Memorandum from the Northern Ireland Veterans Advisory and Pensions Committee
I write to you on behalf of the above committee to raise concerns regarding the implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant (AFC) in Northern Ireland and to respectfully request that the Commons Northern Ireland Affairs Committee (NIAC) consider launching an inquiry along similar lines than that announced by the Commons Welsh Affairs Committee on the 31 October 2011.
There is a perceived lack of movement with regards to implementing the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland. Some Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly use Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act to veto any attempt to implement the AFC and some others use it as an excuse to do nothing, This should not mean that we should do nothing as this leaves the Service and Ex‐Service Communities in Northern Ireland at a disadvantage to the rest of the United Kingdom. Something needs to be done (even if quietly) to help and support the Service and Ex‐Service Communities in Northern. Ireland.
The NIAC may also be able to help with regards to the AFC Interim Report (2011). It states on page 8 of the report:
"Many of the services delivered by Government to members of the Armed Forces Community are provided in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland by the Devolved Administrations. In drafting the report, we have taken care to ensure that we distinguish clearly between the situation in different parts of the UK where that is a relevant factor. It will be apparent from the text that our relationship with the Scottish and Welsh Governments is well advanced in these areas, but also that there is further work to be done in building links with the Northern Ireland Executive"
It may be that the NIAC could establish what is being done about building links with the Northern Ireland Executive and by whom.
On page 14 of the report it also states:
"In acknowledging the very considerable progress made, we wish to draw particular attention to two points that we would expect to see addressed in the next annual report to be published in the autumn of 2012, The first is the application of the principles underlying the Covenant in Northern Ireland and, associated with that; the absence of Northern Ireland representation on the Covenant Reference Group, The Annual Report reflects this point but it is one which we hope could he addressed with the devolved administration sooner rather than later".
It would be very helpful if the NIAC could address these two very important points.
I look forward to your response.
February 2012 Further memorandum from the Northern Ireland Veterans Advisory and Pensions Committee
About Us
Veterans Advisory and Pensions Committees (VAPCs), are statutory bodies established by government to support the Veterans’ community of ex‐Servicemen and women, war widows (ers) and their dependents.
Members, all volunteers, are appointed by the Secretary of State for Defence but the committees are independent of both the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA) and the Ministry of Defence (MOD).
The committees, formerly known as War Pensions Committees, were established in 1921 in the wake of the First World War. Their role was to assist the Ministry of Pensions. Members adjudicated on and administered grants to disabled ex‐Servicemen and also organised the care of widows and neglected children. They also monitored the Government’s administration of the War Disablement Pension Scheme.
Although both the title of the committee and its responsibilities have changed, ensuring that Veterans and their dependents are aware of the benefits to which they are entitled under, for example, the War Pension and Armed Forces Compensation Schemes, remains central to their role.
There are now 13 VAPCs organized on a regional basis throughout the United Kingdom, with separate committees in the Isle of Man and the Republic of Ireland. In the latter, the Secretary of State appoints six members and the remainder are from ex‐Service charity organisations.
Many VAPC members are ex‐Servicemen and women. Their role is described in detail below.
The Role of the VAPCs
1) Raising awareness
The VAPCs raise awareness, especially at local level, of the support available to Veterans via the:
a) War Pensions Scheme, b) Armed Forces Compensation Scheme, c) SPVA Veterans Welfare Service, d) Welfare Pathway and public service provision, e) cross‐government support to both Veterans and serving members of the Armed Forces and their families 2) Assisting The VAPCs assist the Veterans community by
a) acting as advocates for the implementation of cross‐government support to injured personnel, their dependants and Veterans. b) highlighting gaps or issues in provision of services and feeding these back through SPVA or any mechanism subsequently put in place by the providing Department or organisation. c) understanding the welfare provision network in their local areas and assisting Veterans and dependants in accessing local services as envisaged under the Service Personnel Command Paper. d) working with all parties to assist individual Veterans and their families when they are unable to obtain the required support and are experiencing difficulty in accessing services. e) referring individual Veterans and their families to SPVA Welfare for assessment where appropriate. f) monitoring the SPVA welfare service and liaising with other organisations with a view to ensuring the welfare needs of veterans and their dependants are addressed.
3) Advising and representing The VAPCs can advise and represent Veterans:
a) who have problems or complaints regarding their War Pensions or the AFCS claims process where there is no formal recourse to an independent body. VAPCs liaise closely with SPVA. b) by offering an independent explanation of a scheme as it relates to an individual Veteran, assessing issues in response to specific complaints. c) by providing a formal independent review of complaints by convening an Independent Complaints Panel where necessary, as outlined by the SPVA complaints procedure.
4) Recommending The VAPCs play a part in consultation processes which affect Veterans by
a) acting as a conduit for local consultation by Ministers, the MOD and the SPVA on issues affecting Veterans who receive a pension from either the War Pensions or Armed Forces Compensation Schemes. b) Commenting on policy initiatives put forward by government.
Northern Ireland Armed Forces and Veterans Community:
We believe that the Veterans and Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland are disadvantaged compared to their counterparts in the rest of the UK. Some would say that Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act is a barrier and that it should be amended. Our concern is the apparent lack of Political interest to either allay these fears or to actively address the issues.
Other devolved administrations have put mechanisms in place to address the needs of veterans but there does not seem to be any movement by the administration in Stormont. Communication has been entered into with Members of Parliament and Government Ministers but the response has been that this falls within the remit of Stormont. It is alarming to note that, the NI Executive failed to respond to a request for their input into the “Armed Forces Covenant” Annual Report 2012.
On 28 June 2010, the Armed Forces and Veterans Bill was introduced as a private Member’s Bill by Mr David McNarry, however the administration at Stormont did not endorse this. In addressing the COMMITTEE FOR THE OFFICE OF THE FIRST MINISTER AND DEPUTY FIRST MINISTER on 12 January 2011, Mr Bob Collins (Equality Commission for Northern Ireland) stated:
“As far as the remit and interest of the Equality Commission is concerned, it appeared initially as though what was represented as the intention of the draft Bill may have been in some conflict with equality legislation. However, on the face of it, after careful reading, the Bill seems not to conflict with any equality or anti‐discrimination legislation.”
What is concerning to us is disparity and disadvantage, we as a body are not calling for preferential or priority treatment for the Armed Forces Community and Veterans, all we ask is for parity with other Armed Forces Communities and Veterans throughout the rest of the UK.
If we may give some examples where we believe some progress could be made.
Housing
In England, Scotland and Wales a high priority is given for adapted social housing for seriously injured service leavers.
Employment
Spouses of service personnel are disadvantaged on posting to Northern Ireland. CRB checks are not valid in Northern Ireland.
Education
Family can apply for a school place on receipt of a married quarter address but a supernumerary place cannot be applied for by the school until the child is resident, this can lead to a gap in education and does not instil a seamless transfer.
Health
Service people with severe genital injuries are guaranteed three cycles of IVF in England, two to three in Scotland and two in Wales. In Northern Ireland eligible couples are offered one IVF treatment.
Links between the Armed Forces Community in NI and Departments of the NI Executive.
Some informal links probably exist but are not necessarily trumpeted as otherwise they may attract adverse reaction from political opponents.
38 (Irish) Bde is the regional infrastructure organisation which has responsibility for all serving personnel.
Reserve Forces & Cadets Association NI (RFCA NI) has responsibility for reservist employment issues and it has been suggested in Parliament that they should broaden into other associated spheres. (They are new in the field of caring for Veterans) However Government has already put in place other organisations to advise and deliver welfare not to mention the excellent work of other MOD providers, for example:
• the Veterans Advisory and Pensions Committee (VA&PC) and the Veterans Welfare Services (VWS) who work within the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA), • the UDR and R IRISH (HS) Aftercare Service (both of these organisations being part of the MOD), • also the outstanding work of the local Service and Ex‐Service Charities including the Royal British Legion, Combat Stress, SSAFA Forces Help, the NI Phoenix Project and Naval, Regimental and RAF Associations.
What is missing in a Northern Ireland context is an overarching level of coordination, cooperation and governance.
The only coherent link between any of these “Armed Forces community” agencies is the “Armed Forces Liaison Forum” where routine meetings take place (2 or 3 times a year) within Dept of Health and Social Service and Public Safety (DHSSPSNI) attended by Bde, Aftercare Service, Veterans Welfare Service, VA&PC and ex‐services charities such as Combat Stress, Royal British Legion and the Army Family Federation.
The NI Equality legislation (Sect 75 of the Northern Ireland Act) legally prevents veterans or anyone else being treated more favourably than others but it is our opinion that the word priority conjures up some form of preferential treatment over someone else. This we believe, is wrong and all we aspire to achieve is to insure that no one within the Armed Forces & Veterans Community is disadvantaged because of their background or service.
Principal barriers come from opponents citing Sect 75 which is legally binding. This we believe is akin to the industry barrier of “you cannot do that because of health and safety”
There are those that would use the legislation to veto any progress in implementing the AFC (or parts thereof) and others that would use it as an excuse to not do anything.
The level of coordination between the NI Executive, the Northern Ireland Office (NIO), the MOD and other relevant UK Government departments
These links must include the welfare service providers, both MOD and Charities, who are best placed to support all Veterans, The Northern Ireland Devolved Government must be seen to support the Armed Forces and Veterans Community with practical and financial assistance.
The absence of NI representation on the Covenant Reference Group
As of today’s date we are still unaware if Northern Ireland is still not represented on the Covenant Reference Group
January 2013 Memorandum from the Department for Social Development Northern Ireland
Executive Summary
1. The Department for Social Development is responsible for housing policy in Northern Ireland. The Department’s position is that applicants for social housing or homelessness assistance must not be disadvantaged because of a background in the Armed Forces.
Introduction
2. The Department for Social Development:
• has overall control and responsibility for preparing and directing social housing policy in Northern Ireland;
• works closely with the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and Registered Housing Associations in implementing social housing polices, and
• has regulatory powers over the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and Registered Housing Associations.
Information for the Committee
Access to social housing
3. Article 22 of the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 requires the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to allocate its housing accommodation according to a Scheme approved by the Department. By agreement, registered housing associations in Northern Ireland also allocate their housing according to the Housing Executive’s Housing Selection Scheme.
4. Article 29 of the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 makes it unlawful to discriminate, directly or indirectly, on the basis of political opinion or religious belief in the allocation of housing in Northern Ireland. While the Housing Selection Scheme did at one time include additional points for ex‐service applications, such provision is now likely to be unlawful. The Department’s current approach is based on ensuring that ex‐service personnel are treated no less favourably than other applicants and work to date has focused on three issues:
• homelessness;
• connection with Northern Ireland, and
• guidance.
Homelessness
5. Under the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1988, the Housing Executive has a duty to secure that accommodation becomes available for eligible applicants who are unintentionally homeless and in priority need. To ensure that individuals who are do not become homeless when they are discharged from the Armed Forces, the Ministry of Defence issues a “Certificate of Cessation of Entitlement to Occupy Service Living Accommodation” 6 months before discharge. The Department has ensured that the Housing Executive will accept such a Certificate as evidence that an applicant is threatened with homelessness and therefore falls within the scope of the Executive’s statutory duties to provide advice about the prevention of homelessness and, where the applicant has a priority need, to secure that accommodation is available.
6. Article 5 of the 1988 Order provides that a homeless person has priority need for re‐ housing if they are vulnerable for any special reason. The Department takes the view that ex‐service applicants who are at risk of homelessness or rough sleeping because of their institutional background are vulnerable persons within the meaning of Article 5 and should be awarded priority status.
Connection with Northern Ireland
7. A particular rule of the Housing Selection could be interpreted in such a way as to render applicants for social housing ineligible if they are ex‐service personnel from other parts of the UK who have been based in Northern Ireland.
8. As a first step towards removing this potential barrier, the Housing Executive has been instructed to interpret the rules of the Housing Selection Scheme in a way which does not disadvantage any ex‐service applicant. The necessary amendment to the Scheme will be made at the next available opportunity.
Guidance
9. The Department aims to issue guidance for the Housing Executive on the provision of housing for service and ex‐service personnel. The thrust of the guidance will be that applicants for social housing or homelessness assistance in Northern Ireland must not be disadvantaged because of a background in the Armed Forces.
Future position on social housing in Northern Ireland
10. In England, legislation requires councils to give additional preference for housing to certain applicants with connections to the Armed Forces and prevents councils from using the requirement for applicants to have a “local connection” in a way that discriminates against applicants who have served with the Armed Forces in the council’s area.
11. The Department has commissioned academic experts to undertake a fundamental review of social housing allocation policy in Northern Ireland. The experts have been asked to explore the possibility of giving some recognition to ex‐service applicants. However the different legal framework makes it unlikely that we would be able to fully reflect the position in Great Britain.
Affordable housing
12. On 27 April 2012, the Scottish Government announced that the priority groups eligible to apply for its shared equity schemes for first time buyers would include serving members of the armed forces and veterans as well as widows, widowers and other partners of service personnel killed in action.
13. Given that the provision of affordable housing is governed by the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998, it is unlikely that it would be lawful to follow the Scottish example in Northern Ireland.
14. The Department is exploring new ways in which more affordable homes can be delivered for all and has offered to facilitate a meeting between a local veterans’ organization (AA Veterans Support) and the Northern Ireland Co‐Ownership Housing Association.
Adapted housing
15. Service personnel leaving the Armed Forces because of injury or disability can be allowed stay in service families’ housing for 3 months after discharge but may ultimately need access to adapted social housing. This need is assessed by the Housing Executive and, because of their disabilities, seriously injured ex‐service personnel are likely to have a high priority for adapted dwellings.
16. The Housing Executive works with other providers, including veterans’ organizations, to ensure that the full range of applicants’ needs can be met.
Conclusion
17. In summary, the Department’s position is that applicants for social housing or homelessness assistance must not be disadvantaged because of a background in the Armed Forces. The Department’s current approach to access to social housing is based on ensuring that ex‐service personnel are treated no less favourably than other applicants, in line with the Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 and the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998.
January 2013 Memorandum from the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission
1. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (the Commission) pursuant to Section 69 (1) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, reviews the adequacy and effectiveness of law and practice relating to the protection of Human Rights.1 In accordance with this function the following advice is submitted to the Committee in response to its call for evidence on the Implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland (NI).
2. The Commission provides advice drawing upon the full range of internationally accepted human rights standards, including the European Convention on Human Rights as incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998 and the treaty obligations of the Council of Europe and United Nations (UN) systems which the United Kingdom (UK) has ratified and is therefore duty bound under international law. The relevant international treaties in this context include;
• The European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 (‘ECHR’) [UK ratification 1951]; • The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 (‘ICCPR’) [UK ratification 1967]; • European Social Charter, 1961 [UK ratification 1962]; • The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 (‘ICCPR’) [UK ratification 1976]; • The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 (‘ICESCR’) [UK ratification 1976]; • The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2009 (‘UNCRPD’) [UK ratification 2009]; and • The International Labour Organisation Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 [UK ratification 1954].
3. In addition to these treaty standards there exists a body of ‘soft law’ developed by international human rights bodies. These declarations and principles are non‐ binding but provide further guidance in respect of specific areas. The relevant standards in this context are;
• Recommendation CM/Rec (2010) 4 of the Committee of Ministers ‘Human Rights of Members of the Armed Forces’; and • OSCE Handbook on the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Armed Forces Personnel
4. The Commission notes that there are concerns regarding the implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant in NI. For example, the Ministry of Defence 2012 Annual Report on the Covenant states:
“In contrast to Scotland and Wales, it has not been possible to make the same progress in building support for and delivering the Armed Forces Covenant
1 Northern Ireland Act 1998, s.69 (1). from within the Northern Ireland Executive. The suggestion that the Covenant could provide preferential access to cross‐government services for serving and former members of the Armed Forces could be seen as running counter to their strict equalities legislation”.2
5. The Commission in its submission will provide advice on the international human rights obligations which the UK Government and NI Executive are required to comply with. This submission does not advise however on the application of NI domestic equality legislation as this function is within the competence of the Equality Commission NI.
6. International human rights law requires the UK Government and NI Executive to guarantee protections to all persons on an equal basis, without direct or indirect discrimination of any kind. In particular, the Commission advises that jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case of Engel v Netherlands has made clear that:
“the Convention applies in principle to members of the armed forces and not only to civilians. It specifies in Articles 1 and 14 that ‘everyone within (the) jurisdiction’ of the contracting States is to enjoy ‘without discrimination’ the rights and freedoms [set forth within it]” 3
7. The Commission further advises that the ECtHR has ruled that a differential treatment of certain groups may be justified provided that it meets a legitimate aim and is proportionate.4 Indeed, the Court has found that a failure to make reasonable and proportionate adjustments for persons with unique circumstances may amount to discrimination.5 An example of this in the domestic context is the Court of Appeal judgement in the case of Burnip et. al.6 In this instance the Court of Appeal found housing benefit regulations to be discriminatory as they failed to make reasonable adjustments for disabled tenants who may require an additional room to accommodate a carer overnight.
10. The Commission advises that international human rights bodies have recognised the need for specific protections for armed forces personnel and have sought to enhance protections through a number of instruments. For example, the Committee of Minister’s Recommendations draw upon the right to adequate food as protected by the ICESCR, Article 11, setting out the right of members of the armed forces to decent and sufficient nutrition. Similarly, further to the right to family life as protected by the ICESCR, Article 10 and the ECHR, Article 8, the OSCE Handbook
2 Ministry of Defence 2012 Annual Report on the Covenant 3 Engel v Netherlands, European Court of Human Rights, 8 August 1976, European Human Rights Reports, Vol. 1, 1979, p. 647 4 Posti and Rahko v Finland (App. 27824/95), 24 September 2002, (2003) 37 EHRR 58 5 Glor v. Switzerland case (Application No. 13444/04, judgment 30 April 2009) 6 Burnip, Trengove, Gorry v SSWP [2012] EWCA Civ 629 recommends that “armed forces should organize programmes for assisting families/partners in case of deployments abroad”. 7
11. Whilst international human rights instruments principally refer to serving members of the armed forces, a number of the standards also set out obligations with respect to veterans. For instance, the Committee of Minister’s have recommended that states put in place appropriate compensation schemes for persons leaving the armed forces due to injury as a result of service.8
12. The Armed Forces Covenant relates to armed forces personnel as defined broadly, including both serving individuals and those who are no longer in service.9
13. In respect of serving personnel the Covenant contains a number of obligations which reinforce existing human rights. For example, it recognises Government’s “responsibility to maintain an organisation which treats every individual fairly, with dignity and respect, and an environment which is free from bullying, harassment and discrimination”.10 This recognition accords with the ICCPR, Article 7 and the ECHR, Article 3, both of which prohibit torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. Moreover, the commitment to address such incidents reflects a recommendation by the Committee of Ministers that states take “robust action .. to morally condemn any such treatment and to bring to justice and punish those responsible”.11
14. The right to accommodation of an adequate standard protected by the ICESCR, Article 11, is also addressed by the Covenant as it recognises that “Where Serving personnel are entitled to publicly‐provided accommodation, it should be of good quality, affordable, and suitably located”. This commitment reflects the recommendation of the Committee of Ministers that armed forces personnel’s accommodation should provide sufficient living space and be appropriately ventilated.12
15. In respect of veterans, the Covenant provides protection for the right to social security, which may include a pension, and elaborates on the range of support to be made after service. This provision accords with the European Social Charter, Articles 12 and 13, and the International Labour Organisation’s Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952. The provision also reflects the Committee of Ministers Recommendations, which require that “Retired full‐time professional members of the armed forces should be granted an adequate retirement pension which allows them to live decently and participate in public, social and cultural life”13. The provision in the Covenant requiring additional support for those injured in service is reflective of
7 OSCE ‘Handbook on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Armed Forces Personnel’ (Warsaw: 2008) pg 187 8 Ministry of Defence ‘Armed Forces Covenant’ 2011 Page 6 9 Indeed in certain respects it extends to the family of service personnel 10 See Covenant Page 7 11 Recommendation CM/Rec (2010) 4 of the Committee of Ministers ‘Human Rights of Members of the Armed Forces’ Seepage 30 Explanatory Memorandum 12 Ibid para 62 13 Ibid para 65 provisions within the UNCRPD, which specifically recognise the right to social protection for persons with disabilities.
16. The Commission notes that the Covenant aims to ensure the Armed Forces community suffer “no disadvantage due to service”. It seeks to achieve this aim through taking “positive measures to enable equality of outcome with other citizens” and ensuring “special treatment for the injured and bereaved”. The two approaches are demonstrated with respect to the right to health care, which is protected by ICESCR at Article 12. The Covenant requires that serving personnel who are re‐ deployed throughout the UK should retain respective places on NHS waiting lists. This measure will assist in ensuring that armed forces personnel are not disadvantaged due to the nature of their service, ensuring equality of outcome with other citizens. On the other hand the Covenant requires that those requiring treatment for an injury emerging from their service should receive priority treatment.14
17. As indicated at the outset the Commission will not analyse the implications of the Covenant in the context of domestic equality law. However, the Commission reiterates that international human rights law permits states to make reasonable adjustments where an objective and reasonable justification exists. In making such an assessment the implications on others must be considered. This is illustrated in the aforementioned case of Burnip et al in which the Court of Appeal considered the potential impact on the social housing budget as it affects all tenants before reaching its decision. 15
18. The Commission advises that the Committee consider whether an objective and reasonable justification could be made for affording those injured and bereaved preferential treatment through the introduction of the special measures as set out in the Covenant. It should be noted that international human rights law, and the ECtHR in particular, affords member states a wide margin of appreciation with respect to regulation of the armed forces due to the close correlation to national security.16
19. The Commission notes that both serving armed forces personnel and veterans who are living in Great Britain benefit from the Covenant, those living in NI do not. This raises concerns regarding the equivalency of rights protection throughout the UK, particularly with respect to those rights protected by the Human Rights Act 1998.
February 2013
14 See Covenant Page 6 15 Burnip v Birmingham City Council & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 629 (15 May 2012) 16 Smith and Grady v United Kingdom (2000) 29 EHRR 493 Memorandum from the Committee on the Administration of Justice (‘CAJ’)
1. CAJ is an independent human rights organisation with cross community membership in Northern Ireland and beyond. It was established in 1981 and lobbies and campaigns on a broad range of human rights issues. CAJ seeks to secure the highest standards in the administration of justice in Northern Ireland by ensuring that the Government complies with its obligations in international human rights law.
2. CAJ welcomes the opportunity to provide Written Evidence to the Committee on its inquiry into the implementation of the military covenant in Northern Ireland. The focus of our comments relates to the relationship of the Covenant to the devolved matters of health and housing provision. To this end CAJ would like to draw attention to two important and complimentary equality principles. Firstly that there are duties to target specific measures and initiatives to address the needs of particular groups facing disadvantage including, where applicable, service personnel. Secondly, that it is important in general that measures to tackle disadvantage through health and housing provision are undertaken on the basis of objective need.
3. The principle of objective need has long been incorporated into health and housing provision in Northern Ireland. A good example of this was the establishment forty years ago of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, an independent body set up to allocate houses on the basis of objective need. This decision was made against the backdrop of political bias in housing allocation by local councils. In relation to a strategic framework for tackling disadvantage and social exclusion, the objective need principle was also committed to under the St Andrews Agreement 2006.
4. CAJ is also concerned the inquiry does not become a platform where the equality duties introduced as a central component to the peace process risk being misrepresented or undermined. Further to the commitment in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement Parliament legislated to introduce the statutory equality duty contained in Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. This duty is a policy appraisal tool which obliges public authorities to assess whether policies will constitute an ‘adverse impact’ (i.e. discriminatory detriment) on any of the nine recognised equality grounds. When this is the case public authorities can be obliged to consider alternative or mitigating measures. As official guidance makes explicit the Section 75 duty does not prevent positive action to counter disadvantage among particular sections of society and also states such action may be an appropriate response to redressing inequality.1 CAJ would be concerned at any suggestion that there should be a legislative amendment to Section 75 which would in effect permit policy which may constitute discriminatory detriment.
5. In relation to a legal framework to ensure public authorities take reasonable steps to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups in the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland, CAJ would like to draw attention to another provision of the peace
1 Equality Commission for Northern Ireland ‘Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998: Guide to the Statutory Duties’ February 2005, paragraph 2.1. settlement, namely the Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. The Belfast/Good Friday Agreement deferred advice to Government on the Bill of Rights to an independent body, the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, who delivered its final report in 2008. The recommendations, which are yet to be legislated for, include enshrining rights to health and housing.2 Providing for these rights has been committed to by the UK under international law.3 Contrary to popular misconception this does not mean the state has to, for example, provide everyone with a house. It does however mean public authorities would be obliged to take appropriate measures to ensure any specific needs of disadvantaged groups are being redressed within available resources. This would include addressing the specific health and housing needs of service personnel where specific problems and disadvantage are identified.
6. CAJ is not aware whether a specific assessment of the health and housing needs of service personnel has been conducted in Northern Ireland. Given the differences in circumstances and legislative framework it should of course not be assumed that measures designed for service personnel in London or elsewhere, could necessarily be read over. In the context of its duty of care such a local assessment could prompt the Ministry of Defence to introduce and resource additional specialist support programmes for the health and housing needs of its personnel. It may also identify and recommend remedy of particular barriers constituting unfair disadvantage to service personnel within the general heath and housing policy framework. This would be consistent with an equalities framework. Consistent with the principles set out above we would however caution against any measures which would in effect afford preferential treatment on a basis other than objective need for health and housing waiting lists and related provision.
7. In relation to some of the specific housing and health issues which have arisen in debate, consistent with the policy framework set out above, it would be reasonable that, for example, temporary absences are disregarded for the purpose of assessing entitlement to publicly funded health care. We note that in Northern Ireland health regulations already provide a broad exemption for service personnel in relation to meeting ordinary residence requirements for NHS care.4 More problematic however would be any scheme amending housing legislation to afford priority status to service personnel for housing provision on a basis other than objective need. Such a move would risk conflicting with the above principles and framework.
February 2013
2 Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission ‘A Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland: Advice to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland’ (Belfast, 2008), pages 45‐7. 3 Including under the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). 4 Provision of Health Services to Persons not Ordinarily Resident Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2005 SR 2005/551, rule 3(h).
Memorandum from the Regimental Association of The Royal Irish Regiment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 This submission has been compiled and is submitted on behalf of the Regimental Association of The Royal Irish Regiment. In this submission we wish to influence the committee’s deliberations in respect of the Implementation of the Military Covenant in Northern Ireland not just for our members but for all members and ex‐members of Her Majesties Armed Forces living or serving in Northern Ireland.
2 We are fully aware of the progress made in England, Scotland and Wales and it is a travesty that UK law is not applicable here in Northern Ireland because of local Northern Ireland legislation. We suggest to the committee that Northern Ireland is a special case and we wish to put forward some ideas which will bring together the whole Ex‐Service community in Northern Ireland. We also note that there is no representation from Northern Ireland on the Military Covenant Reference group. This is a matter that must be put right with the utmost haste.
3 We are aware of the other Ex‐Service Associations in Northern Ireland who represent Ex‐ members of the Royal Navy, the numerous Regimental Associations of the Army and the Royal Air Force Association, all doing their own thing but unfortunately, it is our experience that we do not talk to each other! So one of our recommendations is the establishment of an Ex‐Services forum. There is also the Royal British Legion (RBL) of which many of our members are also members of that group. All these groups are voluntary organisations who do sterling work supporting their own branch members each in their own way; each in isolation from each other. This needs fixed which is why we are in favour of a Northern Ireland Ex‐Service or Veterans Forum.
4 The main impediment to implementation of the Military Covenant in Northern Ireland is ‐ Section 75 – as we shall refer to it ‐ of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. This causes us the most concern and is without doubt the major issue that needs addressed urgently. Quite simply, it is the main impediment to implementing the Military Covenant in NI. There is no doubt in our mind that at the time of drafting the Sect 75 legislation it was never envisaged that it would be at odds with the later drafted Military Covenant ‐ but it now is. How is this issue to be dealt with to allow NI veterans to be on a par with the rest of the UK?
5 The Defence Secretary is on record in the House of Commons of stating that any changes to the 1998 Act is a matter for the Local Assembly as it is NI legislation. That may be correct so how is this to be fixed? It must be fixed if NI Veterans are not to be discriminated against.
RECCOMENDATIONS
6 We recommend the following, which are not in any order of priority, to the Inquiry with our sincere plea that these be adopted.
a. An NI Veterans Commission is established with legal powers to support ALL Veterans in NI. b. An NI Veterans Forum is set up to co‐ordinate all the disjoined veterans associations in NI c. An NI Veterans representative is immediately appointed to the Military Covenant Reference Group to champion our NI Veterans concerns and issues.
d. Legislation is introduced to amend Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to exempt HM Forces Veterans from the NI Act therefore providing the same rights and support as in the Rest of the UK. e. The UDR/R IRISH Aftercare is expanded to provide the same and more service and support to all HM Forces Veterans living in NI.
7 The following pages provide further details to support the above recommendations.
INTRODUCTION
8 The Army Resettlement program, managed by the Career Transition Partnership (CTP) is established to assist service leavers to find civilian jobs. The CTP does not assist service leavers in any of the social requirements like finding housing, doctors, dentists etc. in the area that they choose to live in after their service is completed. All of these were provided whilst serving in the Forces. Only when faced with leaving does the service member have to face the challenge of obtaining their own housing etc.
AFTERCARE
9 As part of the disbandment package for the R IRISH Home Service in 2007, an Aftercare organisation was established. It’s remit being to provide support for those ex‐R IRISH Home Service soldiers by providing four main support areas:–
a. Welfare, Medical, Vocational, Benevolence.
10 It should be remembered that since 1970 some 65,000 personnel have served in the UDR & R IRISH, a not insignificant number of the total Northern Ireland veteran’s populace. Add to that population those being demobbed from the rest of the Army; the Royal Navy & the Royal Air Force, who choose to settle in NI at the end of their service. So we suggest that the ex‐service population in NI is a significant section of the whole community.
11 The establishment of the Aftercare Service has been a success; ask anyone who has had the need to use its services and they will confirm this fact without hesitation. It was initially funded for five years commencing in 2007, however in 2011/12 funding was extended by the MoD, we believe until to 2014/15. What happens then? The veterans will still be here. They will still have continuing needs to be addressed; be it medical, social or welfare needs. Who is going to provide that service?
12 The Aftercare service is and remains unique in the Army; no other group of Ex‐Army personnel have access to this kind of bespoke organisation and the service they provide. They have to rely on The Royal British Legion, which does great work for veterans or they have to rely on their own Reg imental Association, in one exists here in Northern Ireland.
13 So what about all the other Ex‐members of the Armed Forces living in Northern Ireland? They have no right of access to the Aftercare Service. This must surely be wrong. If the establishment of the Aftercare Service in 2007 was set up and funded specifically for the R IRISH Home Service ‐ and it has worked – then surely there is a need to expand its remit to include the rest of the Ex‐Service population residing here and indeed in Southern Ireland as well.
REGIMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS
14 At the same time as The Home Service Battalions of The Royal Irish Regiment were disbanding our Regimental Association formed. The Ulster Defence Regimental Association had already been established some years previously in the 1980s. At the time of writing the R IRISH Association has approximately 500 members attending Branches throughout NI and one Branch in England. There are many other Associations in NI which are too numerous to mention.
RESERVISTS
15 As more and more reductions are occurring in HM Forces and greater reliance is to be made on Reservists then they also must be considered in this equation as well. NI has a sizeable population in the Reserves and they are veterans as well with their own specific needs and support requirements. It would be our view that they have nothing by way of support organisation other than the RBL.
SPECIFIC INQUIRY POINTS:
16 We consulted on the specific points requested in the Inquiry calling notice and received the following comments and views. Some have been edited in the interests of brevity.
Links between the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland and Departments of the NI Executive.
17 Links exist but are not necessarily trumpeted as otherwise they may attract adverse reaction from political opponents. 38 (Irish) Bde is the regional infrastructure organisation which leads for all serving personnel, Reserve Forces & Cadets Association NI (RFCA NI) has recently attempted to lead on behalf of 38 (Irish) Bde for veterans. Why –
a. They are already engaged on reservist employment issues and keen to broaden into other associated spheres. b. Downside – RFCA NI is new to this particular game and has not appreciated other efforts already being made on behalf of veterans, i. notably by the Veterans Advisory and Pensions Committee (VA&PC) within Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA), ii. by the UDR and R IRISH (HS) Aftercare Service (both of these organisations being part of the MOD), iii. by the NI Phoenix Project and by Regimental Associations. c. This has led to a degree of friction which better communication and co‐ordination can ease.
18 Needs a degree of joining up to make it coherent but the principal is accepted of “private, not public; bottom up and not top down”.
19 The only coherent link between any of these “Armed Forces community” agencies and “NI Executive” is thought to be in the field of Health and Social Services, where routine meetings take
place within Dept. of Health and Social Service and Public Safety (DHSSPSNI) attended by 38 (Irish) Bde, Aftercare Service, Veterans Welfare Service and ex‐services charities such as Combat Stress. As far as we know no ex‐service associations attend.
20 In principal, better to let these successful, although quiet approaches continue rather than insist on full, open and public demands for access. The NI Equality legislation (Sect 75) legally prevents veterans or anyone else having any degree of priority anywhere, so why fight it and hand a political victory to our detractors?
Barriers to progress, statutory or otherwise, in implementing the Covenant;
21 Political: Principal barriers come from political opponents citing Section 75 which is legally binding. We therefore believe that this is the main area to focus on. It is actually is the case that due to the presence of the Aftercare Service, many UDR/R IRISH veterans are actually better off in terms of welfare support than some of their counterparts in GB.
22 Security: For a service person that has been away from normal life in NI, serving for perhaps twenty‐two years in the forces and then returning to NI to settle down into a new civilian life is not without its problems. Those who served in the R IRISH Home Service Battalions are likely to be more ‘street wise’ than comrades who have been absent and serving elsewhere in the world and will not be up to date with NI’s idiosyncrasies.
23 Let’s face it; there are people in our communities who are anti HM Forces, past present and no doubt in the future. Some of these people are employees within the very government departments that are supposed help veterans but they cite Section 75 as the reason why an NI resident Veteran cannot receive priority. This is not the case in England, Scotland or Wales, where Ex‐Services personnel do get priority. Here in NI, the immediate issues of having to find a house and get onto the housing list in the area he/she wants to settle in; finding a doctor, finding a dentist, getting children into schools etc. Even applying for jobs the question of employment history is a dead giveaway and identifies the applicant as ex‐military. All of these are a worry for the Ex‐service personnel returning to NI and to trying to assimilate back into the community.
24 If the veteran has been medically discharged from the forces it is for the NHS to treat him/her as there are no longer any military hospital facilities in NI.
SECTION 75 ISSUES
25 Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 is the equality legislation that formed a key element of the Belfast agreement. Section 75 places a statutory duty on public authorities to promote equality when carrying out their functions in relation to Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, officials in various Government Departments who would be able to help ex‐ service personnel have refused to so as they would be in breach of Sect 75 of the Act. 26 This problem is well known as… a. Paragraph 36 of the Defence Committee report, “The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 1: Military Casualties”, states: i. “The provisions of section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 prevents the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS) and the Health and Social Care (HSC) sector in Northern Ireland in providing war veterans with
priority over other individuals with respect to healthcare treatment.” b. In the “Report of the Task Force on the Military Covenant” of September 2010 they stated that, “Service personnel” based in Northern Ireland: i. “…are disadvantaged more than their contemporaries elsewhere… E.g., Service families in the province are prevented from identifying themselves as such due to the security situation. This can cause difficulties for partners in explaining their career history to prospective employers and for Service children in obtaining the necessary support in schools, among other issues.” The level of co‐ordination between the NI Executive, the Northern Ireland Office, the Ministry of Defence and other relevant UK Government Departments:
27 It is known that formal links exist between all these groups and many more informal links are already in place. 38 (Irish) Bde must use its own MOD department to champion the armed forces community and therefore it is somewhat passive towards the NIO, but facilitates it at every level. Not certain if more formal levels of coordination are actually necessary to improve the lot of the armed forces community, especially veterans.
28 Why can’t we have a Veterans Commissioner for NI? We have Commissioners for many other groups and they were created because there was deemed to be a need to have one someone in charge of the issues for that specific grouping. We contend that there is a need for a Veterans Commissioner in NI. Why? For the very reasons that there needs to be a joined up head in charge who can bring together all the veterans groups in NI under one umbrella and have the teeth to dealt with all issues pertaining specifically to NI veterans.
The absence of NI representation on the Covenant Reference Group.
29 This must be put right immediately – we were appalled to discover this fact when researching for this paper.
30 The Aftercare Service has proved to be a success so it must be strengthened and expanded to include all veterans in NI. It needs continued funding; agreement of resources; protection of assets/tools; it must be independent; and there must be no interference in its running.
OTHER COMMENTS
VIEWS FROM THE R IRISH BANBRIDGE BRANCH:
31 Any legislation on this matter must guarantee that all former and serving members of the Armed Forces be treated the same as every other citizen. They must not suffer from any form of discrimination due to their service in HM Forces.
32 Former members of the Armed Forces have served in many conflict and humanitarian zones around the world; they do so by direction and orders of their Government and Commanders. Sadly, due to the recent conflict in Northern Ireland and the Armed Forces role in it, it is felt that there is an increased risk of discrimination directed as ex‐service personnel either by individuals, group or a government agency towards individuals.
33 We believe that in respect to housing, a member of the Armed Forces nearing discharge and who wishes to return to the area from which they left at the beginning of their service, is at a distinct disadvantage to the rest of the general public who have always resided in that area. This is due to the fact that the former service person will be treated like any other individual wishing to move to that area with little or no consideration given to the fact that the individual had no choice but to move to where the ship or unit they were posted to was stationed. We feel that the ex‐ service personnel should, at the point of discharge from the Armed Forces, be treated like others who resided in the area they wish to return, to so as to create a more level playing field for individual.
34 With regards to benefits the above mentioned point can also have an adverse effect to the ex‐service person due to the fact that if they cannot obtain a permanent address; as they are deemed to be “voluntarily leaving their previous address” they will not be eligible for certain benefits. Perhaps this is a factor why some ex‐service personal are living on the streets.
35 With regards to employment ex‐service personnel starting out in their new career can face more significant challenges that other members of the public do, one example is the misconception that ex‐service personnel wishing to take an instructional career will always act like they are dealing with service personnel on a parade ground (on a personal note I myself have heard employers stating this).
36 There is a special situation within Northern Ireland that does not exist within the rest of the United Kingdom; ex‐members of the armed forces living in Northern Ireland will always have to contend with the “personal security” issue when approaching any individual or agency for help. This is due to this fact that the ex‐service person may have to hold back from divulging information to the individual or agency for fear of compromising themselves as an ex‐serviceman/woman and potentially presenting themselves as a target for terrorists
37 Due to the current economic situation many charitable organizations that help ex‐service personnel are suffering from lack of funds. This along with the Armed Forces withdrawal from Afghanistan, its massive downsizing and the continued end of service members leaving will next year and for many years, make it harder for those charities to raise funds. The lack of “front of media” exposure will result in the Armed Forces slipping further and further from the public conscious leaving many ex‐service personnel to carry on with their lives with the physical and mental scars of service but with less and less help available.
COMMENTS FROM THE R IRISH EAST TYRONE BRANCH:
38 The UDR/R IRISH Aftercare Service ‐ It has matured into an outstanding organisation and we would strongly recommend that it should be extended to include all ex MOD who live in Northern Ireland and further extended and given guaranteed funding for the next 5 to 10 years.
39 Difficulty in coming forward to seek help – security risk! ‐ It is a fact that there is an on‐ going security risk in NI of being identified as a veteran by people who are unsympathetic to veterans who may well be employed by some of the very support organisations which are supposed to provide support and to help veterans. Therefore individual cases need to be dealt with by people within trusted support organisations who will not compromise the veteran’s past. If the veteran can go to an organisation or group that they trust and have confidence in that their past service history is treated confidentially then the reluctance to come forward will be abated.
40 Other ‐ The increasing security risk to all ex MOD needs a process whereby individuals can be kept informed of threats immediately they are identified. It is only those who are members of the Associations who get to find out about increased security threats but only if they attend meetings and usually much too late. A text notification from a central threat assessment body (38 Irish Bde G2 maybe).
A RECENT CASE EXAMPLE
41 Here is a recent case in point of a now ex‐service soldier who lived his childhood here in Northern Ireland, sought a career in the armed forces, served and has now been medically discharged. He wanted to return ‘home’ to NI with his wife and two children. Here is his story after being medically discharged from the Army after 21 years’ service with the Royal Signals:
a. I served 21 years. I was in the Royal Corps of Signals. I was discharged on the 7 Sept 2012. I had to go through the PAP10 1 process when my kidney disease got to the point where I was unemployable. I was told by various officers that a discharge would be unlikely and that I should be able to finish my 22 years. This did not happen, I got discharged with one year to finish meaning I left with £30k instead of £50k because I could not commute with a medical pension which really REDACTED me off.
b. I did not receive a lot of help from anyone, but to be honest I was never in a position where I needed to ask for it. All I got from the Army was the generic service leaver’s pack and resettlement info. I attended a CTP workshop, worked out what I wanted to do when I left and built my resettlement courses around that.
c. I got medically discharged from the Army but didn't get a discharge date until after the enrolment process had already begun in NI, so I had to go online, look up all the schools in the area I wished to settle and ring them all to see if they had any places available and this was after the summer holidays. Luckily the 2nd preferable school had 2 places spare so I got REDACTED in.
d. As for getting a home I made some inquiries and knew that I would not get to the top of any housing list in NI so I put down half of my leaving money to purchase a house in REDACTED, it was my decision to put down half in order to get better monthly repayment rates etc.
e. As for Job seeking, the jobs that appear on the CTP website (right job) for NI are scarce and nearly half advertised are for REME reservists!! I trawl the jobsites myself, am on Linked In and am currently waiting to be called forward by REDACTED for training on the 28th Jan. I was working for REDACTED group sub‐contracting for REDACTED but got laid off on Friday because they are having problems getting tooled up vans over here and do not want to pay wages while they wait, both jobs I sourced myself online.
f. I joined the same doctor’s surgery as my mum and the rest of the family, and the same goes for the dentist. My medical docs where given to me before I left the Army to pass on to my new doctor.
1 PULHHEEMS Administrative Pamphlet 2010 (PAP 10)
g. I have not joined any British Legion as of yet but will look into it at some stage and I am still waiting to hear back from the Veterans Agency regarding a follow up medical for my war pension, this has been taking a while and its something I need to start chasing.
h. Not sure if this is exactly what your after REDACTED, I tend to do things myself and am generally reluctant to ask for help off anyone or agency unless I truly need it. If I don’t need to use up their resources then they can be concentrating on people who do need it.
i. My biggest gripe is the housing. If I could have been guaranteed a council house I most certainly would have rented to start, and tried using my money to start a business of some kind. As it stands I had to make a decision and putting a roof over my families head is more important than anything else.
42 The above is only one example – every case will be different.
February 2013
Memorandum from the Royal British Legion
I am writing to outline the views of The Royal British Legion regarding implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland.
The Royal British Legion is the UK's leading Armed Forces charity. We provide practical, emotional and financial support to all members of the British Armed Forces past and present, and their families. We actively campaign to improve their lives and safeguard the Military Covenant between the nation and its Armed Forces. We also organise the Poppy Appeal, run one of the UK's largest membership organisations and are recognised as the nation's custodian of Remembrance.
Our mission is to provide welfare, comradeship, representation and Remembrance for the Armed Forces Community.
The Legion was a key player in the decision in 2011 to write the principles of the Armed Forces Covenant into law. Those principles ‐ no disadvantage as a result of Service and special treatment where justifiable, e.g. in the case of Service‐related injury – represent a culture shift, ensuring the welfare needs of the Armed Forces are considered by every branch of Government.
With regard to our welfare provision, I am keen to stress the cross‐community nature of the Legion’s work. In line with our Royal Charter, we have a duty to be there for any individual who has served in the UK’s Armed Forces. We work throughout the island of Ireland; my remit as Area Manager covers both Northern Ireland and the Republic, and we have an Area office in Dublin as well as Belfast. In NI there are 78 Branches and almost £1.3M was raised for the 2011 Poppy Appeal. In the Republic of Ireland, there are ten Legion branches, raising a total of €245k for the 2011 Irish Poppy Appeal. As a non‐sectarian, non‐political organisation, the Legion stands shoulder to shoulder with all who Serve, whatever their background.
Nationally, significant progress has been made within the framework of the key Covenant principles. The exemption from the financial assessment for Universal Credit of compensation paid under the War Pensions Scheme and the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme, and the exemption of Guaranteed Income Payments from the financial assessment for social care provided by Local Authorities are two such examples. The Community Covenant Scheme has revolutionised the way local authorities in Great Britain approach the welfare needs of the service personnel, veterans and Armed Forces families within their areas. Better‐informed Councils have resulted in changes to policies on issues such as school admissions, aiding the smooth transition of service children between schools.
However, we acknowledge that, in NI, the historical and legislative backdrop makes the situation different. The sensitivity of the historical situation in Northern Ireland underlines the importance of a cross‐community consensus on Covenant‐related issues. The Legion is aware that implementation of the principles of the Covenant could potentially contradict NI’s equality laws, specifically Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. In the rest of the UK, one of the key principles being implemented, in relation to the Covenant, is the principle of “special treatment” in certain circumstances. Appearing to discriminate in favour of one group over another would be contrary to the fundamental basis of Northern Ireland’s equality laws.
Furthermore, some issues unique to Northern Ireland will not necessarily be solved through implementation of the Covenant. Due to security concerns, veterans in Northern Ireland often do not reveal their service connection to, for example, their GP. This is not something that will be overcome by implementing the Covenant. Several other situations are affected by this particular problem, including social housing and eligibility for the Pupil Premium.
In terms of future progress on this issue, whilst remaining supportive of the principles of the Armed Forces Covenant, the Legion recognises the need to adopt a distinct approach in Northern Ireland, one that acknowledges and takes account of the unique cultural and legislative environment. There already exists a very high level of cooperation between the key stakeholders here, these being the locally‐based Armed Forces, the Service/ex‐Service charities and the various other agencies and groups which are directly involved in ensuring that the needs of the ex‐Service community in Northern Ireland are recognised and, as far as possible, met.
That said, it would be useful if, in those circumstances where an ex‐Service person is facing a particular difficulty, one which relates to his/her Service and which would be addressed under the principles of the Armed Forces Covenant had he/she been living in any other part of the UK, some means existed by which they could raise their concerns and by which the principle of ‘no disadvantage’ at least could be respected. As you will know, there has been some debate about an Armed Forces Advocate. The Legion takes a pragmatic position on the issue. Whether an advocate is just for the Armed Forces or for the emergency services, including the Armed Forces, we would see such a system as a means to an end, not an end in itself. Such a system would, of course, depend on a cross‐community consensus being forged. We hope very much that the committee’s inquiry can encourage such a development.
February 2013 Memorandum from the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland
Introduction
1. The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland (the Commission) welcomes the opportunity to provide the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee with a submission to its inquiry on the implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland. Our submission concerns the equality laws in Northern Ireland and how these relate to the Armed Forces Covenant1. While the legislative framework on equality is somewhat different in Great Britain, we note that similar issues may arise in the implementation of the Covenant.
The Armed Forces Covenant
2. As we understand it, the Armed Forces Covenant’s central principle is that those who served in the Armed Forces, and their families, should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens. In very general terms, the Covenant provides broad statements of support, encouragement and gratitude to Armed Forces personnel and their families, for their services in current military operations.
3. The Covenant sets a framework for how the Armed Forces Community can be treated, but it does not specify in detail how it should be applied in every case and at every time. The scope of the Covenant, as would be expected, embraces many aspects of life and therefore has potential impacts on the policy development and service delivery of public authorities as well as local service providers.
Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act
4. Public authorities are bound by statutory equality and good relations duties arising from Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. Under Section 75(1), designated public authorities are required, in carrying out their functions, to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity between certain groups2. Such public authorities are also required by Section 75(2) to have regard to the desirability of promoting good relations between persons of different religious belief, political opinion and racial group.
5. Public authorities are required to have an Equality Scheme setting out their practical arrangements for complying with the equality and good relations
1 Annex 1 The remit of the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland 2 Between persons of a different religious belief, political opinion, racial group, age, marital status or sexual orientation; between men and women generally; between persons with a disability and persons without; and between persons with dependants and persons without.
duties. A public authority’s obligations are to have arrangements for assessing and consulting on the likely impact of policies adopted or proposed to be adopted on the promotion of equality of opportunity. In assessing or consulting on proposed policies, a public authority should seek to identify any potential adverse impacts; whether there are further opportunities for the promotion of equality of opportunity and good relations, and to consider alternative options or measures which may mitigate any identified adverse impact of the policy.
6. A public authority must adhere to its Section 75 duties and Equality Scheme commitments. The Section 75 duties must be complied with when it makes a decision to develop or review a policy, but Section 75 does not in itself prohibit the development of particular policies.
Anti‐discrimination legislation
7. As referred to above, a central principle of the Covenant is that the Armed Forces Community should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens. In this regard, it is noted that the Armed Forces Community are protected, to the same degree as all other citizens, by the equality laws in Northern Ireland, and have access to recourse under the equality laws if they consider they have experienced discrimination on any of the protected equality grounds3.
8. There are many aspects of the Armed Forces Covenant which aim to ensure that the Armed Forces Community enjoy the same standard of, and access to, services as other citizens. Such measures include the provision of information and assistance to reintegrate into society. As such, these aspects of the Covenant are consistent with the equality and anti‐discrimination laws.
9. It is, however, when more specific actions which aim to provide the Armed Forces Community with preferential treatment are identified as action that may be taken by a public authority, or private sector organisation, that problems may arise under anti‐discrimination legislation. Examples of such treatment may include preferential treatment in relation to access to housing services, access to leisure services, or discounts in shops and restaurants.
10. In the Commission’s view, such preferential treatment to individuals may be indirectly discriminatory on grounds for example of race or sex or political opinion4. In such cases it would be for the organisation to justify the treatment
3 Protected grounds in NI include age, sex, sexual orientation, religious belief and political opinion, race and disability. It is noted that being a member of the armed forces community is not specifically protected as an equality ground under equality legislation. 4 It is noted that discrimination on grounds of political opinion is protected under the Fair Employment and Treatment Order 1998 as amended and not the Equality Act 2010 which applies in GB.
as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The same issues about potential indirect discrimination would arise in Great Britain on similar grounds.
11. In terms of the provision of a good and harmonious working environment by employers in Northern Ireland, it is noted that many employers have developed equality policies which aim to ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to prevent harassment5. It is recognised that the Armed Forces generally and the associated Covenant are likely to be associated more closely with one community in Northern Ireland. As such, there is a need for employers to ensure that emblems or displays associated with the Armed Forces Covenant are handled appropriately within the workplace. The Commission advises employers that when such displays, presentations or emblems are displayed with decorum (and, if appropriate, during the designated time) and with a sense of due proportion then they are unlikely to create or sustain a hostile environment. It would, however, be for each employer to ensure that it has in place appropriate employment equality policies to ensure that a good and harmonious working environment is promoted.
Conclusion
12. Section 75 must be complied with when a public authority makes a decision to develop or review a policy, but Section 75 does not in itself prohibit the development of particular policies. The public authority must adhere to its Section 75 duties and Equality Scheme commitments.
13. There are many aspects of the Armed Forces Covenant which aim to ensure that the Armed Forces Community enjoy the same standards of, and access to, services as other citizens. As such, these aspects of the Covenant are consistent with equality and anti‐discrimination laws. It is, however, when the Armed Forces Community are given preferential treatment, that problems may arise under anti‐discrimination legislation.
14. The Commission provides advice and guidance to public authorities to enable them to comply with their duties under Section 75 and to all employers with regard their responsibilities under anti‐discrimination law. As part of this advisory service, the Commission advises employers on the provision of a good and harmonious working environment and the sensitivity around emblems which may be associated more closely with one community in Northern Ireland.
5 Equality Commission Guidance: Promoting a Good and Harmonious Working Environment
Annex 1
The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland
1. The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland (“the Commission”) is an independent public body established under the Northern Ireland Act 1998. The Commission is responsible for implementing the anti‐discrimination legislation on fair employment, sex discrimination and equal pay, race relations, sexual orientation, disability and age.
2. The Commission’s remit also includes overseeing the statutory duties equality duties on public authorities in Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998: to pay due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity and pay regard to the desirability of promoting good relations, as well as the duties in Section 49A of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (as amended).
3. The Commission, along with the NIHRC, has also been designated as the “independent mechanism‟ in Northern Ireland, tasked with promoting, protecting and monitoring implementation of the United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).
Written memorandum from the Ministry of Defence
Introduction
The Coalition Government published its Programme For Government on 20 May 2010. In this, the incoming Government made a commitment to rebuild the Armed Forces Covenant. In a subsequent speech on board HMS Ark Royal on 24 June 2010, the Prime Minister said that he wanted the Covenant to be written into the law of the land.
The Armed Forces Covenant was published in May 2011, setting out for the first time its two main principles: that members of the Armed Forces Community should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services; and that special consideration is appropriate in some cases, especially for those who have given the most, such as the injured and the bereaved.
The Armed Forces Act 2011 refers to these principles, but its main purpose is to place an obligation on the Secretary of State for Defence to report to Parliament each year on progress. In each annual report, the Secretary of State is required to state whether or not views have been received from the Devolved Administrations on areas for which they are responsible. The introduction to the 2012 Annual Report states that: “…the views of the Northern Ireland Executive have been sought but not obtained”.
The delivery of the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland requires a different approach from the rest of the United Kingdom to ensure the current support for the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland is not undermined, and to prevent the Covenant becoming unhelpfully politicised. It is important that the unique security, legislative and political context in Northern Ireland is considered and that appropriate governance mechanisms are in place to ensure that support is delivered effectively. The existing network in support of the Covenant in Northern Ireland is working well and, while there is always scope for further improvements, the ends articulated in the Covenant are being increasingly met.
Context
The context for the Covenant in Northern Ireland is complex. Notwithstanding the significant political achievements made in the last two decades, there are enduring security, legislative and political nuances which must be accounted for in the delivery of Covenant outcomes. The normalisation of security measures in Northern Ireland was achieved in July 2007 with the cessation of Operation Banner, the Army’s support to the civil authorities, after 38 years. Throughout this period, the operation called on all three Services and, at its height, saw 28,000 troops deployed in support of the police. More than 250,000 Service personnel made a contribution in those 38 years. Over 600 Service personnel were killed during Operation Banner, a clear indication of the commitment to achieving a stable and secure environment in Northern Ireland. 63,000 personnel of the Ulster Defence Regiment and later the Royal Irish (Home Service) Regiment lived and worked within their own community, and many continue to do so.
The security situation in Northern Ireland has improved significantly but there remains a hardcore of dissident republicans who continue to resist the democratic process. As a result, life in Northern Ireland for serving and retired Service personnel is not normal. The threat to
clearly identified military personnel remains high, and almost all veterans maintain their anonymity lest they become unintended victims of this threat. This reluctance to declare previous service remains a challenge to the identification of individuals who may require assistance.
The largest veteran community is that of the Royal Irish Regiment and the Ulster Defence Regiment. Recognising the enduring security situation, a bespoke Ulster Defence Regiment and Royal Irish (Home Service) Regiment Aftercare Service is in place, funded by the Ministry of Defence. It supports veterans in the delivery of psychiatry, physiotherapy and welfare casework and signposts them to other organisations, according to their needs.
Challenges to implementation
Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 places a statutory obligation on public authorities in carrying out their various functions relating to Northern Ireland, to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity. There is a perception by some that the legislation is acting as a barrier to the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland being implemented on the same basis as the rest of the United Kingdom, however it also ensures that the Armed Forces Community is not disadvantaged when it comes to the provision of public services.
It has been argued that the implementation of the Armed Forces Covenant in Northern Ireland is important enough to justify amending section 75. It is for Northern Ireland Executive Ministers to decide how the Armed Forces Covenant should apply in Northern Ireland, to the extent permitted by law and in those areas for which the Executive is responsible. For its part, the UK Government regards section 75 as a fundamental part of the Belfast Agreement and does not agree that it is desirable to amend it.
Other barriers arise from the current security situation. Members of the Armed Forces Community understand the particular problems that arise from living and working in Northern Ireland. They will sometimes try and reduce their exposure to a higher level of security risk by concealing their links to the Armed Forces.
Despite the challenges, there are many clear advantages to living, serving or settling in Northern Ireland. Many of our Service personnel have chosen to return to the region, bringing much sought after skills to the Northern Ireland economy. The veteran and ex‐ service community are clear net contributors to the community of Northern Ireland in its broadest sense.
Scope of the Covenant
The Covenant extends to those serving in the Armed Forces, whether regular or reserve; to those who have served in the past; and to their families. This group, which amounts to a significant proportion of the UK population, is defined as the Armed Forces Community.
The scope of the Covenant is defined by 15 themes. These were published alongside the Covenant in May 2011 and are as follows: terms and conditions of service; healthcare; education; housing; benefits and tax; responsibility of care; deployment; family life;
commercial products and services; transition; support after service; recognition; participation as citizens; changes in defence; and recourse.
The delivery of some of these themes is the sole responsibility of the UK Government or the Ministry of Defence (for example, in the case of terms and conditions of service, deployment or changes in defence). But in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland the delivery of other themes – including healthcare, education and housing – is the responsibility of the respective Devolved Administrations.
The Scottish and Welsh Governments have been supportive of the Covenant. As part of meeting their responsibilities, the Scottish Government published its report “Our Commitments – Scottish Government support for the Armed Forces Community in Scotland” on 5 September 2012; and the Welsh Government’s “Package of Support for the Armed Forces Community in Wales” was published in November 2011 and updated in November 2012. The Northern Ireland Executive has not made commitments in the same way.
Current status of implementing the Covenant in Northern Ireland
The UK Government, including the Ministry of Defence, is committed to ensuring that the provisions for which it is responsible are applied consistently throughout the UK, to the extent that is permitted by law, including section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. Under the devolution settlements for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the devolved administrations are responsible for many of the policy areas covered by the Covenant. There is therefore scope for variation where the Devolved Administrations are responsible for delivery.
There are inconsistencies in the access that Service personnel living and working in Northern Ireland have to public and commercial services. As an example, fees covered by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills in England, the Scottish Government and Welsh Government to enable Service Leavers to study for a first degree under the Further and Higher Education Scheme are not provided by the Northern Ireland Executive.
In parts of England, Scotland and Wales, members of the Armed Forces who have urgent housing needs are given higher priority for social housing and are not required to prove a local connection. In Northern Ireland, the provision of social housing is administered by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and housing is allocated on a points basis. While it might be sympathetic, the Housing Executive is prevented by the legislation from giving priority to Armed Forces personnel, and the lack of a local connection means they will accrue fewer points. As a result, many serving personnel transitioning to civilian life in Northern Ireland will be not be able to meet the points requirement for social housing.
As these examples show, it can be difficult for some members of the Armed Forces Community to overcome some of the disadvantages arising from Service life and in some cases members of the Armed Forces Community choose not to self‐identify as such when they apply for public services.
It is regrettable that Northern Ireland Executive Ministers have been unable collectively and publicly to endorse the Armed Forces Covenant and advance it more fully in Northern Ireland. However, work is underway at the grass roots level to reduce the disadvantages that
are faced by members of the Armed Forces Community. It is important that gaps in provision are filled, but it is equally important to ensure that this work does not become counter‐ productive.
In contrast to some of the difficulties highlighted in the examples above, Armed Forces units based in Northern Ireland report that provision in Northern Ireland for members of the Armed Forces Community is generally good.
Delivery
The current approach to the delivery of the Covenant in Northern Ireland is to deliver a low‐ key solution. 38 Brigade estimate that between 150 and 200 personnel per year are leaving the Armed Forces to settle in Northern Ireland. The vast majority of those leavers, many of them veterans of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, will transition to civilian life with ease, but a small percentage are likely to encounter difficulties.
At present, the majority of personnel are able to access MOD‐funded support for up to two years after they leave the Services. There is a well established resettlement package in place, which includes the services of the Career Transition Partnership based at Aldergrove, which has a 92% success rate in placing Service leavers in employment in Northern Ireland. In addition, extra resource has recently been applied to support Service leavers in the areas of health, housing, education and welfare to ensure that vulnerable personnel are identified, assessed and given the extra support they require. 38 Brigade works closely with the Service Personnel and Veterans’ Agency and the Reserve Forces and Cadets Association, as well as all the third sector charities. Working groups and links in specialist areas at both the strategic and tactical levels are already well founded.
The Reserve Forces and Cadets Association has established a network of individuals in each of the 26 councils in Northern Ireland that are prepared to engage in dialogue on issues facing the Armed Forces to ensure that no disadvantage exists and may assist in identifying local solutions to problems without contravening legislation.
Wounded, injured and sick personnel benefit from an extra level of support from the Personnel Recovery Unit based in Northern Ireland, and are currently part of a trial under which the Ulster Defence Regiment and Royal Irish (Home Service) Regiment Aftercare Service takes them after they are discharged. Of course, any network needs improvement and refreshing: those supporting serving and retired Armed Forces personnel continue to tackle gaps as they appear, either in the policy space or the delivery space.
A table setting out the position on delivering some of the key Covenant commitments in different parts of the UK is attached for the Committee’s information.
Interaction with the Northern Ireland Executive
There are established links between Headquarters 38 Brigade, acting on behalf of the Armed Forces Community based in Northern Ireland, and the Northern Ireland Departments. For example, 38 Brigade has established links with the Northern Ireland Department of Education on funding for Service children; and, through the Department for Social
Development, with the Northern Ireland Housing Executive on the provision of social housing.
Healthcare is another key issue. As a further example, a relationship between 38 Brigade and healthcare providers in Northern Ireland (in particular the Northern Ireland Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust) has existed for at least six years. The current arrangements include a contract for secondary healthcare for serving personnel. In August 2009, the then Northern Ireland Health Minister launched a new protocol for liaison between his Department and the Armed Forces in Northern Ireland, aimed at ensuring that members of the Armed Forces, their families and veterans were not disadvantaged when seeking access to health and social care services and received the same services as the rest of the population in Northern Ireland. The protocol covered waiting lists, dentistry, IVF, prosthetics and the availability of mental health facilities; and it matched the commitments made in respect of England, Wales and Scotland in these areas at that time.
On 22 January 2013, the Minister of State for Northern Ireland, Mike Penning MP, held a meeting with 38 Brigade staff and representatives from a range of Service charities operating in Northern Ireland. The aim of the meeting was to begin a process of identifying where gaps exist in the provisions made for the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland and to consider whether there was any overlap.
Community Covenant
One of the areas where implementation is especially difficult is in relation to the Armed Forces Community Covenant. To date, around 230 Community Covenants have been signed with local authorities in England, Scotland and Wales; and Ministers are keen to see agreements put in place with as many local authorities as possible in Great Britain. The approach in Northern Ireland needs careful consideration because we recognise that it might not be helpful to try and extend coverage to district councils in Northern Ireland. There is a risk that pressing for Community Covenants to be established in Northern Ireland could serve to highlight divisions in some communities and thus be counter‐productive. In any event, in Northern Ireland fewer public services are delivered by district councils than their local authority counterparts in Great Britain.
Governance
A new Cabinet Sub‐Committee was established in December 2011 to oversee work on the Armed Forces Covenant and maintain momentum. This Ministerial Committee is chaired by Oliver Letwin, the Cabinet Office Minister for Government Policy, and has the following members to represent the different areas of the United Kingdom on non‐devolved matters: Minister of State at the Northern Ireland Office; Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Scotland Office; and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Wales Office.
The key stakeholder group responsible for facilitating, monitoring and reporting on the work undertaken to fulfil the obligations set out in the Armed Forces Covenant is the Covenant Reference Group. The Group is chaired by the Cabinet Office and brings together officials from a range of UK Government departments with representatives from the three Families Federations, a number of Service charities and other organisations. Since its inception, the
Group has included representatives from the Scottish and Welsh Governments. Following initial dialogue with the Northern Ireland Executive at official level, a seat has been available for the Northern Ireland Executive but this has not so far been taken up.
At the working level, a network of contacts has been established (and is frequently used) with Armed Forces Champions appointed in other Government departments and in the Devolved Governments in Scotland and Wales. The Northern Ireland Executive has not chosen to appoint an Armed Forces Champion in Northern Ireland.
Conclusion
The Covenant applies to the whole Armed Forces Community, wherever its members are located, and the Ministry of Defence is keen to see it implemented widely. We recognise that the circumstances for the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland are different, for reasons that are well understood. We consider it important that the Armed Forces Covenant does not become a trigger for division and that work to implement it in Northern Ireland proceeds on a basis that is agreed by all. We will seek to ensure that members of the Armed Forces Community are not disadvantaged compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services by working at the most appropriate level; and that Service charities are able to continue to go about their business.
February 2013
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM THE MOD – COVENANT COMMITMENTS IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE UK
Aspects of the Armed Forces Covenant fall to Devolved Authorities and so there is some variation in the implementation of measures relating to several themes: healthcare, housing, education, family life, transition and support after service.
Healthcare
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area 1. Mental - DH and MOD fund Big - Big White Wall website - Big White Wall website - Big White Wall website health White Wall for Armed Forces available to Armed Forces available to Armed Forces available to Armed Forces Community in England. Community in Scotland. Community in Wales. Community in NI.
- 24 Hour Helpline available - 24 Hour Helpline available - 24 Hour Helpline available - 24 Hour Helpline available to Armed Forces Community to Armed Forces Community to Armed Forces Community to Armed Forces Community in England. in Scotland. in Wales. in Northern Ireland.
- Approx 50 extra veterans - The Veterans 1st Point - Mental Health and Well- - UDR and R IRISH (Home mental health nurses. service provides mental Being Service for Veterans Service) veterans are able to - National Veterans’ mental health services in the NHS (part funded by MOD). access the UDR and R IRISH health network established by Lothian region. The Scottish (HS) Aftercare Service, which DH in England Government is considering - An All Wales Veterans provides welfare support, rolling it out across Scotland. Health and Wellbeing Service medical services and a has been funded by the benevolence capability. - Scottish Government is Welsh Government since introducing a new mental April 2010. Each Welsh health strategy that Local Health Board is addresses the needs of the appointing an experienced whole population, including clinician as a Veterans veterans and Service Therapist with an interest in families. or experience of Service health problems.
2. Veterans - Priority NHS treatment for - Priority NHS treatment for - Priority NHS treatment for - DHSSPSNI ensure no veterans subject to the veterans subject to the veterans subject to the disadvantage and prioritise clinical needs of others. clinical needs of others. clinical needs of others. according to clinical need.
- Veterans Information - Veterans Information - Veterans Information - Veterans Information
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area Service is being rolled out to Service is being rolled out to Service is being rolled out to Service is being rolled out to contact personnel 12 months contact personnel 12 months contact personnel 12 months contact personnel 12 months after leaving Armed Forces. after leaving Armed Forces. after leaving Armed Forces. after leaving Armed Forces.
- Veterans Scotland has - No priority afforded to created an online information veterans as NI Equality portal and quarterly meetings legislation prohibits. now held with a Minister. - Veterans are less likely to - Scottish Government has disclose previous service due funded the Veterans Assist to security concerns. portal.
3. - Prosthetic limbs are same - Prosthetic limbs are same - Prosthetic limbs are same - Prosthetic limbs are same Prosthetics standard as those given by standard as those given by standard as those given by standard as those given by DMS. DMS. DMS. DMS.
- DH to announce enhanced - The same standard of disability service centres for prosthetic limbs are provided veterans in February 2013. to the whole population, thus ensuring equality legislation is not breached.
- DHSSPSNI directed towards BLESMA for additional funding.
4. IVF - Service people with service - Service people with service - Service people with service - Eligible couples in NI are related serious genital related serious genital related serious genital offered one cycle of publicly injuries are guaranteed three injuries are guaranteed two injuries are guaranteed two funded IVF. free cycles of IVF. or three free cycles of IVF. free cycles of IVF.
- The NHS in Wales is aiming to provide three cycles of IVF to all eligible patients in time, in line with NICE guidelines,
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area but this is subject to competing priorities and so may take time to achieve.
5. Better - E-learning package - E-learning package - E-learning package - Unaware of e-learning information launched September 2011. complete. complete. package. Investigation in for GPs Package to be updated by progress. end March 2013. - Transfer of medical records - Transfer of medical records from MOD to GPs. from MOD to GPs. - Transfer of medical records - Transfer of medical records from MOD to GPs – although from MOD to GPs. - All GP practices have been some Service Leavers may provided with a leaflet about not authorise release of their veterans. docs due to security concerns.
6. Mobility - For families of those serving - NHS waiting list time - NHS waiting list time - NHS waiting list time the waiting time on a NHS list accrued in another location is accrued in another location is accrued in another location is is taken into account when taken into account when taken into account when taken into account when moving to another location. posted. posted. posted.
- Other factors taken into account will be target waiting list times and clinical need.
- In NI, waiting times are a maximum of 9 weeks for an outpatient appointment; 9 weeks for diagnostic test; and 13 weeks for day-case or inpatient.
7. Training - Working to get Service - Working to get Service - Working to get Service - Working to get Service medical training recognised medical training recognised medical training recognised medical training recognised professionally. professionally. professionally. professionally.
8. - Armed Forces Champions - Armed Forces Champions - Armed Forces Champions The Armed Forces, AFF,
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area Champions on every NHS board. on every NHS board. on every NHS board. VAPC and ex-Service charities are represented on - Champions have been the Northern Ireland appointed in all local Department of Health, Social authorities. Services and Public Safety Armed Forces Liaison Forum (the NI version of the Armed Forces Network).
9. Dental - Continue to monitor access - Increased dental service - NHS dental care is - Wide availability of NHS to NHS dentists. provision in areas with high generally available to all dental care to all NI citizens. Armed Forces population. Welsh residents.
10. - The NHS Commissioning - NHS Scotland are on the - NHS Wales are on the - DHSSPS NI are on the Monitoring Board will be joining the Partnership Board with MOD. Partnership Board with MOD. Partnership Board with MOD. MOD/UK Departments of Health Partnership Board. - Established an expert Armed Forces and Veterans - Covenant Reference Group Group to track delivery of ongoing monitoring of healthcare commitments. progress. - Scottish Government is a full partner on the Service-led Firm Base Forum.
Housing
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area 11. Social - High priority for adapted - High priority for adapted - High priority for adapted - High priority for adapted housing social housing for seriously social housing for seriously social housing for seriously social housing for seriously injured. injured. injured. injured.
- Service personnel and - Service leavers have an - Service leavers have an - No known priority for Service leavers cannot be established local connection established local connection Service leavers or veterans
disqualified because they do in an area. in an area. as NI Housing Exec operates not have a local connection in a points system based on an area. - Service leavers can apply - Service leavers can apply DHSS benefits and individual for social housing before for social housing before circumstances. - Additional preference for leaving Armed Forces. leaving Armed Forces. Service leavers with urgent - Service Leavers less likely housing needs. - Considering whether giving - Local authorities have to disclose previous service local authorities more flexibility to prioritise Service due to security concerns. - Guidance issued to flexibility would help social personnel. encourage local authorities to landlords address the - There is no “dedicated” prioritise Armed Forces housing needs of former Service leaver contact in the Community. Service personnel. housing executive for social housing. - National housing guide published. - Service personnel cannot be seen to be treated more - Allocations guidance favourably, as with any other revised to highlight veterans cohort in NI, due to the issues. equality legislation.
12. - Top of the priority list for the - Priority access to the - Priority access to Northern Ireland Co- Government Government’s £500m Scottish Government’s Low government home ownership Ownership Housing is home FirstBuy scheme and all Cost Initiative for First Time schemes. available but Armed Forces ownership other Government home Buyers (LIFT) shared equity do not receive preferential schemes ownership schemes. schemes. treatment.
- Armed Forces Home - Part-funding a facility in Ownership Scheme being Cahill, Glasgow comprised of piloted. 50 housing units with access to outreach support for veterans.
13. Council - Local authorities have - Local authorities have - Local authorities can give a - There is no council tax in tax discretion to set a council tax discretion to set a council tax 50% or a 25% discount, or no NI. Domestic Rates are discount on second homes discount on second homes discount at all, on second charged. Full rates are between 10% and 50%. between 10% and 50%. homes. payable on empty properties. Reductions available in - For Service personnel who - For Service personnel who - For Service personnel who certain circumstances (eg low
own or rent a private own or rent a private own or rent a private income or disabled). property, a 50% council tax property, a 50% council tax property, a 50% council tax Application may be made discount may be claimed discount may be claimed discount may be claimed where property is incapable from their local authority from their local authority from their local authority of occupation. where their main job-related where their main job-related where their main job-related dwelling is provided by MOD dwelling is provided by MOD dwelling is provided by MOD - Relief may be claimed for in England, Scotland or in England, Scotland or in England, Scotland or those who pay rates in NI Wales. Wales. Wales. when serving on operational deployment overseas (MOD - Council Tax Relief may be - Council Tax Relief may be - Council Tax Relief may be Scheme). claimed when serving on claimed when serving on claimed when serving on operational deployment operational deployment operational deployment overseas (MOD Scheme). overseas (MOD Scheme). overseas (MOD Scheme).
Education
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area 14. Service - A £3M Support Fund has - A £3M Support Fund has - A £3M Support Fund has - A £3M Support Fund has children been established for State been established for State been established for State been established for State Schools with Service Schools with Service Schools with Service Schools with Service Children. Schools Children. Schools Children. Schools Children. Schools experiencing the effect of experiencing the effect of experiencing the effect of experiencing the effect of exceptional mobility and/or exceptional mobility and/or exceptional mobility and/or exceptional mobility and/or deployment of their Service deployment of their Service deployment of their Service deployment of their Service community can bid to fund community can bid to fund community can bid to fund community can bid to fund mitigating action to the mitigating action to the mitigating action to the mitigating action to the betterment of the whole betterment of the whole betterment of the whole betterment of the whole school. school. school. school.
- Scholarships for bereaved - Scholarships for bereaved - Scholarships for bereaved - Scholarships for bereaved children to study at university. children to study at university. children to study at university. children to study at university.
- Service Pupil Premium - Annual assessment and - Annual assessment and - Service Pupil Premium, fund. long term monitoring. long term monitoring. currently highest in UK. Will only apply to children of -The revised School - Established a Children of - Family can register in families not normally resident
Admissions Code now Service Families Working catchment area for school on in NI and who have been includes children of UK Group with CEAS, local receipt of posting notice. posted there for a period Service personnel in the list authorities, the Independent scheduled to last no less than of infant class size excepted Schools Sector and the - Specialist Educational two years. pupils. Services in Scotland. Needs support will not be interrupted when families - Service Child indicator is - Family can register in move (implementation 2014). listed on the annual census, catchment area for school on but not always completed by receipt of posting notice. the parent for security concerns. - A Service child indicator is now part of the Annual - Family can register with a School Census. school on receipt of married quarter address, but the - Specialist Educational school cannot apply for a Needs support will not be supernumerary place (if interrupted when families required) until physically move (to be implemented in present in NI. 2014). - Special Educational Needs will be considered where an existing statement is in place, but may not be exactly the same as the previous provision and the child must be in NI to facilitate assessment.
15. Service Entitled Service leavers get Entitled Service leavers get Entitled Service leavers get leavers tuition fees paid for a first tuition fees paid for a first tuition fees paid for a first degree. degree. degree.
Family Life
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area 16. Service - Improved portability of CRB - Improved portability of CRB - Improved portability of CRB - CRB checks not recognised partners checks within an employment checks within an employment checks within an employment in NI. Personnel must re-
sector. sector. sector. register with AccessNI.
- Job Centre Plus does not - Job Centre Plus does not - Job Centre Plus does not - Job Centre Plus does not consider a Service spouse to consider a Service spouse to consider a Service spouse to consider a Service spouse to have given up a job have given up a job have given up a job have given up a job voluntarily if being posted voluntarily if being posted voluntarily if being posted voluntarily if being posted with a partner. with a partner. with a partner. with a partner.
-Creation of Jobcentre Plus - Creation of Jobcentre Plus -Creation of Jobcentre Plus -Creation of Jobcentre Plus Armed Forces Champions to Armed Forces Champions to Armed Forces Champions to Armed Forces Champions to assist Service families find assist Service families find assist Service families find assist Service families find employment. employment. employment. employment.
- Giving Service spouses - Giving Service spouses - Giving Service spouses - Giving Service spouses early access to the new work early access to the new work early access to the new work early access to the new work programme. programme. programme. programme.
- Introduction in Apr 10 of NI - Introduction in Apr 10 of NI - Introduction in Apr 10 of NI - Introduction in Apr 10 of NI credits for Service spouses credits for Service spouses credits for Service spouses credits for Service spouses living overseas. living overseas. living overseas. living overseas.
- Easement of rules to Job - Easement of rules to Job - Easement of rules to Job - Easement of rules to Job Seekers’ Allowance and Seekers’ Allowance and Seekers’ Allowance and Seekers’ Allowance and Employment and Support Employment and Support Employment and Support Employment and Support Allowance to prevent Allowance to prevent Allowance to prevent Allowance to prevent disadvantage for Service disadvantage for Service disadvantage for Service disadvantage for Service spouses who have lived spouses who have lived spouses who have lived spouses who have lived abroad. abroad. abroad. abroad.
- Civil service will do all it can - Civil service will do all it can - Civil service will do all it can to help civil servants return to to help civil servants return to to help civil servants return to the same department after the same department after the same department after being deployed with a being deployed with a being deployed with a partner. partner. partner.
- More flexible approach to vocational qualifications.
Transition
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area 17. - Where possible, Service- - Where possible, Service- - Where possible, Service- - Where possible, Service- Employment related training and work related training and work related training and work related training and work skills receive commensurate skills receive commensurate skills receive commensurate skills receive commensurate accreditation by Nationally accreditation by Nationally accreditation by Nationally accreditation by Nationally Recognised UK Awarding Recognised UK Awarding Recognised UK Awarding Recognised UK Awarding Bodies. Bodies. Bodies. Bodies.
- ‘Be the Boss’ Enterprise - ‘Be the Boss’ Enterprise Support for ex-Service Support for ex-Service personnel. personnel.
- Troops to Teachers scheme being launched.
Support after Service
Commitment England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland area 18. Injured - Continuous automatic - Continuous automatic - Continuous automatic - Same as Great Britain but Service entitlement to Blue Badges entitlement to Blue Badges entitlement to Blue Badges with security implications in people for seriously injured Service for seriously injured Service for seriously injured Service applying for Blue Badge and personnel and veterans. personnel and veterans. personnel and veterans. concessionary travel pass.
- Eased access to - Eased access to - Eased access to concessionary travel for concessionary travel for concessionary travel for seriously injured Service seriously injured Service seriously injured Service personnel and veterans. personnel and veterans. personnel and veterans.
Written memorandum from Combat Stress
1. Summary
Combat Stress is a 93 year old UK wide charity. We have supported almost 100,000 ex‐Service men and women of every campaign that British Forces have been involved in since the First World War. We have a current caseload of more than 5,000 Veterans, including 637 who served in Iraq and 284 who served in Afghanistan. 750 of Combat Stress’ case load of 5,000 active Veterans live in Northern Ireland. For Veterans resident in Northern Ireland Combat Stress provides:
• Access to residential clinical treatment (delivered at our Hollybush House treatment centre in Ayrshire, Scotland) and Community Outreach clinical and welfare support for ex‐Service men and women who suffer from mental health problems, including psychological trauma, which might be attributable to or associated with their service in the Armed Forces, Merchant Navy or allied forces. • A dedicated 24 hour Helpline for those seeking help.
In addition:
• Combat Stress is a strategic partner of all four UK Departments of Health and the Ministry of Defence. • Combat Stress is a partner with the Royal British Legion in a Department of Health Third Sector Strategic Partnership. • The Charity has developed excellent relationships with a large number of other ex‐Service and national charities. • Combat Stress is commissioned by the National Commissioning Group (NCG) to provide a six‐week intensive Post‐Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) rehabilitation programme in a residential setting for Veterans resident in England.
Evidence
“Links between the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland and Departments of the NI Executive”
2. Combat Stress enjoys a warm relationship with the Aftercare Service, which provides support to those who served in the home service battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment (previously known as the Ulster Defence Regiment before 1992). This support includes assistance in finding employment, help with any physical disabilities or mental health issues. The Aftercare Service does not provide support to those who served in the Army (including Veterans from the regular battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment), Navy or RAF.
3. Combat Stress’ Director of Strategic Planning & Partnerships Lieutenant Colonel Peter Poole has also previously met with the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister to discuss Combat Stress signing up to be involved in the Commission for Victims and Survivors, a meeting of which Lieutenant Colonel Poole subsequently attended on behalf of Combat Stress.
“Barriers to progress, statutory or otherwise, in implementing the Covenant”
4. Combat Stress understands the desire to provide equality of access to treatment for psychological trauma to civilian victims of terrorism, as well as ex‐Service men and women. However, Combat Stress’ charter means that the charity can only treat ex‐Service men and women who suffer from mental health problems, including psychological trauma, which might be attributable to or associated with their service in the Armed Forces, Merchant Navy or allied forces. If Combat Stress was mandated to provide treatment to civilian victims of terrorism, it would therefore effectively prevent the charity from operating in Northern Ireland.
“The level of co‐ordination between the NI Executive, the Northern Ireland Office, the Ministry of Defence and other relevant UK Government Departments”
5. Combat Stress is a strategic partner of all four UK Departments of Health and the Ministry of Defence, and we therefore know that the level co‐ordination between those bodies is extremely high. We would of course welcome any strengthening of the co‐ordination between the NI Executive, the Northern Ireland Office and other UK Government Departments, as that can only ever be a good thing.
“The absence of NI representation on the Covenant Reference Group”
6. Combat Stress would be very supportive of Northern Ireland representation on the Covenant Reference Group. 750 of Combat Stress’ case load of 5,000 active Veterans live in Northern Ireland. It strikes us as important in ensuring that there is equal coverage across all four nations of the UK, that there is equal representation on the Covenant Reference Group. Whoever was chosen to represent Northern Ireland on the Covenant Reference Group would of course have to be someone who commanded respect from across the political spectrum in Northern Ireland, something that Combat Stress is very conscious of and sensitive to.
February 2013
Written memorandum from the Democratic Unionist Party
INTRODUCTION: The DUP is proud of the contribution made by men and women from Northern Ireland who have served the United Kingdom in many theatres of conflict across the globe and especially here in Northern Ireland and we salute their sacrifice. With an increasing proportion of armed forces personnel from the province being deployed on operations in Afghanistan, including from reserve units, the number of personnel and veterans requiring welfare support is on the rise again. With the ending of Op Banner, many of the military healthcare facilities previously available in Northern Ireland such as the Duke of Connaught Unit at Musgrave Park hospital have been removed. This has created a greater reliance on NHS and personal health and social care services in Northern Ireland and sometimes means that personnel have to travel to facilities on the mainland for treatment. The Military Covenant is designed to assist armed forces personnel and veterans to access these services without being disadvantaged by virtue of their service. There is evidence that this is not working as well in Northern Ireland as it is in other parts of the UK.
CONTEXT: A recent report published by the World Health Organisation on post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) found that Northern Ireland had a higher incidence of PTSD and trauma‐ related illnesses than any other conflict‐related country in the world. That included places such as Lebanon and Israel. It was remarkable that the study found that nearly 40% of people in Northern Ireland had been involved in some kind of conflict‐related traumatic incident. The survey estimated that violence had been a distinctive cause of mental health problems for about 18,000 people in Northern Ireland. Against that backdrop, the health and social care services in Northern Ireland seek to provide a service to members of our armed forces and veterans from Northern Ireland. There is already a huge demand on these services from across Northern Ireland as a result of trauma‐ related illnesses arising from the conflict. Before remarking on current deficiencies in the service, we want to acknowledge that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS), within the constraints of devolution, has made efforts to ensure that a degree of assistance is given to members of the armed forces and veterans in Northern Ireland when providing health and personal care. The Health Minister, Edwin Poots MLA has stated that he is determined to ensure that our service personnel and veterans receive the level of support they require when they need it. His Department has established an Armed Forces Liaison Forum linked to the armed forces protocol, which has done valuable work in seeking to co‐ordinate the health and social care response to the needs of service personnel and veterans living in Northern Ireland. In addition, the Department has worked with the Reserve Forces and Cadets Association and military charities to examine how services can be improved in line with the objectives of the military covenant. Additionally, the Department for Social Development with Nelson McCausland MLA as Minister has sought to ensure that the housing needs of those leaving the armed forces are taken into account under the housing selection scheme operated by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. We also want to praise the work of the aftercare service put in place specifically for those who served with the Ulster Defence Regiment and the Royal Irish Regiment Home Service Battalions. The DUP fought hard to secure this service in the period leading up to the disbandment of the home service battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment. We worked with the previous Government towards the establishment of the service, because we recognised that one of the legacies of the troubles were the many people who had served in the armed forces in Northern Ireland over a prolonged period as part of Operation Banner, the longest‐running military operation in the history of the British Army. These men and women had served constantly. It was not a matter of spending six months on operational deployment in Northern Ireland and then maybe not coming back for another two years. Rather, the Royal Irish Regiment, and the Ulster Defence Regiment before it, served continuously on military operations in Northern Ireland for a very long time—from the early 1970s through to the disbandment of the home service battalions— and was recognised for its service with the award of the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross by Her Majesty the Queen. The aftercare service provided to veterans of the Ulster Defence Regiment and the Royal Irish Regiment makes an important contribution towards ensuring that those who have served in Northern Ireland are provided with the care and support they need. We believe that the Royal Irish Aftercare Service can be a model that other parts of the United Kingdom might seek to implement. It takes a hands‐on approach, not just responding to the needs of soldiers with medical issues or welfare problems, but proactively engaging with people to ensure that their needs are met. We hope that the Government will continue to fund and resource the service properly and it is our objective that it should be expanded to include other veterans and service personnel living in Northern Ireland.
THE PROBLEM: Whilst recognising the aforementioned measures that are already in place in Northern Ireland, the DUP, together with others, has a concern about the full implementation of the military covenant here and the fact that there are service personnel and veterans who are not getting the support they need. We could cite a number of examples of individual cases where veterans and armed forces personnel resident in Northern Ireland are not receiving adequate support under the Covenant but we will focus on just one at this stage, for which family consent has been given. James Burns is a young man from County Antrim who was, until recently, a Lance Corporal with the RM Commando. After a period of operational service in Afghanistan, he returned to his family in Northern Ireland and developed post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Sadly, as a result of his illness he turned to alcohol. The result of this lethal combination of alcohol and his medical condition meant that James developed violent behaviour and got into trouble, harming himself and those around him. Only a few months after his military career ended, he is sadly now in prison serving a sentence. There is something wrong with a system in which a soldier comes home from operational deployment to his family and, within months, finds himself serving a prison sentence for behaviour that he and his family would argue may have been beyond his control because of his medical condition. Neither his family nor we seek to excuse what James has done. The point is this that James returned from military operations, developed PTSD and did not receive the welfare and support that he undoubtedly needed to cope with his illness. We are convinced that this is due, at least in part, to the fact that the Health Service, in line with the requirements of the covenant, did not deal adequately with his case. The military authorities also failed to offer him adequate support, perhaps because he lived in Northern Ireland and was deemed to a certain extent to be ‘out of sight…..’. There is clearly more that we can do to help young men like James and, indeed, young women who develop post‐traumatic stress disorder as a result of the traumatic experiences that they have had to endure while on operational deployment. In August last year, we wrote to the Minister for the Armed Forces, Andrew Robathan MP at the Ministry of Defence to raise this case. We understand that, owing to issues relating to data protection legislation, he was unable to respond in as much detail as he might have wished. His advice was that James should “contact the welfare service at the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency.” The Minister provided a helpline number for that service. He went on: “I would also strongly encourage James to raise any medical concern with his GP. James may also wish to consider contacting the charity Combat Stress”. Whilst we acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with that advice per se, our point is that there should be someone in the system who can get alongside people like James and to help them and their families gain access to the level of care that they need and in this case, before they end up in prison. Consequently, we believe that the model for the Royal Irish Aftercare Service could be expanded to cover service personnel and veterans like James. As a starting point, we would like to see it expanded in Northern Ireland to incorporate those service personnel and veterans who have served or continue to serve in our armed forces, whether in the Royal Irish Regiment, the Irish Guards or any other armed forces unit, and who reside in Northern Ireland and perhaps also in the Republic of Ireland. Why should Northern Ireland get such special treatment? We should do so because we have a special problem when it comes to the full implementation of the military covenant. That special problem is section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998—the equality legislation that formed a key element of the Belfast agreement. Section 75 places a statutory duty on public authorities to promote equality when carrying out their functions in relation to Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, officials in various Government Departments in Northern Ireland who might be able to offer support to veterans and service personnel say they are unable to give any form of preferential treatment in line with the objectives of the Military Covenant, because of the restrictions placed upon them by this legislation Let us bear it in mind that the Military Covenant requires only that action should be taken to ensure that a veteran or a member of the armed forces should face “no disadvantage” as a result of serving or having served in the armed forces. In other words, they should be placed in the position in which they would have been, had they remained a civilian. Unfortunately, however, section 75 is being used in a way that can prevent full implementation of the Military Covenant in Northern Ireland. Undoubtedly we have a problem, but there are a number of ways in which that problem could be overcome. In a submission to the House of Commons Defence Committee, it was made clear by the current Northern Ireland Minister for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Edwin Poots, that there was a problem. In a letter dated 12 December 2012 to the Member of Parliament for Lagan Valley Rt Hon Jeffrey Donaldson MP, Mr Poots also stated: “The position I inherited in taking up my position as Minister for health, Social Services and Public Safety is that in Northern Ireland patients are treated on the basis of assessed clinical need with no priority being afforded to any particular group of patients, including armed forces veterans. This arises from the obligations placed on public bodies under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 which requires my Department, in carrying out its functions, to have regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity across a number of specified groups.” (See Annex A) Paragraph 36 of the Defence Committee report, “The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 1: Military Casualties”, states: “The provisions of section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 prevents the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS) and the Health and Social Care (HSC) sector in Northern Ireland in providing war veterans with priority over other individuals with respect to healthcare treatment.” As far as implementation of the Covenant in Northern Ireland is concerned, the “Report of the Task Force on the Military Covenant” of September 2010 stated that “Service personnel” based in Northern Ireland: “are disadvantaged more than their contemporaries elsewhere…For example, Service families in the province are prevented from identifying themselves as such due to the security situation. This can cause difficulties for partners in explaining their career history to prospective employers and for Service children in obtaining the necessary support in schools, among other issues.”
EXTENDING THE AFTERCARE SERVICE: The Military Covenant Task Force Report, in reviewing implementation in Northern Ireland alluded to a key recommendation that states: “One possibility currently under consideration is to extend the Northern Ireland aftercare service to cover all veterans based in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.” The DUP would like to see all service personnel and veterans of the UK armed forces who reside in either Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland covered by the aftercare service, so that they get the help they need when they need it. Therefore, we hope that the Committee and the Government will give careful consideration to the proposition that the aftercare service should be extended to include, not only veterans living in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, but serving members of the armed forces who live in either part of the island and whom, for whatever reason, may require treatment or access to other services for themselves or their families. The proposed expansion of the Royal Irish Aftercare Service might also be combined with addressing the need for some kind of treatment and respite facility for the armed forces in Northern Ireland. At present, a veteran or current member of the armed forces living in Northern Ireland who is suffering from conditions such as post‐traumatic stress disorder and needs recuperation may go to Hollybush House in Scotland. We recognise that a locally based respite centre will not be appropriate for all cases and there are personal sensitivities and needs that will continue to be met at facilities in other parts of the UK. Nevertheless, the DUP should like the Government to work with the military charities, the Reserve Forces and Cadets Association, and other stakeholders in Northern Ireland to find a way of resourcing a respite centre here. Whilst responsibility for resourcing such a centre would rest partly with Government, it is worth noting that the people of Northern Ireland are very generous when it comes to military charities. Year on year, Northern Ireland consistently gives more to the poppy appeal than any other region of the United Kingdom, and other charities such as Help for Heroes are well supported here. Northern Ireland receives a share of that money, and we do not in any way criticise the military charities. Indeed the work of the RBL, SSAFA, ABF– the Soldiers Charity, Combat Stress, AAVS etc. as well as various Regimental Associations and Benevolent Funds is vital in supporting veterans and service personnel. However, it would be good to see those charities unite with the Government, the RFCA and others in considering what enhanced facilities we might provide in Northern Ireland. That would constitute further recognition of the generosity of the people here who support such worthy causes.
COMMUNITY COVENANTS IN NORTHERN IRELAND: In recent comments to the Welsh Affairs Committee on the 30 October 2012, the MOD Minister Mark Francois MP highlighted the particular challenge in Northern Ireland of implementing the community covenant. Some local authorities in Northern Ireland are controlled by Sinn Fein and, unfortunately, there seems to be some reticence on the part of the SDLP when it comes to implementation of this aspect of the Military Covenant. As the Minister pointed out when he gave evidence to the Welsh Affairs Committee, some local authorities in Northern Ireland seem reluctant to support the full implementation of the covenant. There is a need to explore other ways in which community covenants can be implemented throughout Northern Ireland without being impeded by certain elements in local government. Consequently, the key issues that the DUP wishes to raise concerning full implementation of the Military Covenant can be summarised as follows: • The existing pressures on health and social care services in Northern Ireland as a result of the legacy of over 30 years of the ‘troubles’. • The particular problems faced by armed forces personnel and veterans in having to access some services on the mainland. • The specific issues that arise from section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and the impact this has on full implementation of the Military Covenant. • The need to expand the work of the Royal Irish Aftercare Service to incorporate all armed forces personnel and veterans living in Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic. • The need to consider the establishment of a treatment and respite centre for armed forces personnel and veterans in Northern Ireland. • Finding a way to ensure the establishment of community covenants in Northern Ireland.
KEY RECOMMENDATONS: The DUP urges the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee to consider recommending that the Government implement the following measures to ensure that veterans and armed forces personnel have access to adequate treatment and support under the Military Covenant:
1. That the Aftercare Service currently operated by the Royal Irish Regiment is extended and resourced to provide welfare support to all veterans and armed forces personnel resident in Northern Ireland. Consideration should also be given to including veterans and personnel who have served or continue to serve with the UK Armed Forces and who reside in the Republic of Ireland.
2. That the Government cooperate with the military charities to establish and fund a treatment and respite centre in Northern Ireland for veterans and armed forces personnel.
CONCLUSION: The DUP believe that Her Majesty’s Government has a duty to support the armed forces and the veterans who have served this country so well, and our Party is happy to work with Ministers in pursuing this vital work. No political obstacle and no political party should get in the way of full implementation of the covenant in every region of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland. Appendix – Correspondence from Edwin Poots MLA, Minister for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, to Jeffrey Donaldson MP, 19 December 2012
Thank you for your letter of 13 November on behalf of your constituent [redacted] a former member of the armed forces, who is awaiting treatment for injuries to his shoulder.
Firstly, allow me to say how sorry I am to learn about [redacted] condition. It is fully understandable that he should wish to ensure that he avails of the best treatment which the health service can provide, and in a timely manner.
The position that I inherited in taking up my position as Minister for Health, Social Services and Public Safety is that in Northern Ireland patients are treated on the basis of assessed clinical need with no priority being afforded to any particular group of patients, including armed forces veterans. This arises from the obligations placed on public bodies under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 which requires my Department, in carrying out its functions, to have regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity across a number of specified groups. This remains as the current policy position.
My Department does however recognise the need to hear about the concerns of members of the armed forces and in 2009 we established an Armed Forces Liaison Forum which meets regularly and provides opportunities for representatives from the armed forces and veterans organisations to discuss healthcare issues with departmental representatives and service commissioners and providers.
With regard to access to treatment generally in Northern Ireland I find it unacceptable that patients should have to wait longer than is necessary for treatment and that is why I have set challenging performance targets follows for the Health and Social Care providers. I am sorry to hear that [redacted] has waited over a year to have an MRI scan. We have checked the latest position with the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust and the Trust has advised that [redacted] was seen on 1 November 12 and was added to the waiting list for surgery. He can expect to receive a date for surgery in June 2013. However, I am concerned about the time taken to reach this position and I have written to the Chief Executive of the Belfast HSC Trust asking him to respond directly to you on this matter.
I hope that you have found this reply helpful.
March 2013 Written memorandum from the Army Families Federation
1. AFF is an evidence based organisation that lobbies for change when families feel that there is an issue that needs addressing. At present AFF have little evidence from families outlining that they feel disadvantaged whilst serving in Northern Ireland specific to the absence of a covenant. AFF would always welcome any extra support serving soldiers and their families may receive due to the implementation of a covenant within Northern Ireland.
2. Families have a strong support network within the Armed Forces Community in Northern Ireland and many are aware that their needs can be addressed and dealt with on their behalf by the Chain of Command and agencies that are currently in place.
3. Evidence bought to the attention of AFF would suggest that security issues remain a concern for those living in military accommodation in Northern Ireland. Families based in NI experience a unique set of issues whilst living there and bring many of these issues to the attention of AFF.
4. AFF has no evidence on which to base an opinion on the level of co‐ordination between different Government Departments.
5. AFF would welcome NI representation on the Covenant Reference Group, especially if the needs and support of military families in NI was highlighted as an issue to be addressed now and in the future.
6. Any concerns highlighted at present would be directed through 38(Irish) Brigade.
April 2013 Written memorandum from SSAFA Forces Help, Northern Ireland Branch
I am writing to give an overview of the work of the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association, Forces Help (SSAFA) and to put in context the work of the Branch in Northern Ireland.
The Association was established in 1885 under Royal Charter. SSAFA's mission is to relieve the need, suffering and distress of those who serve in our Armed Forces, those who used to serve, and the families of both.
On the in‐service side we provide Family Health and Social Services under contract to the Ministry of Defence, in Germany, Cyprus, Gibraltar, Brunei and the Falkland Islands. Additionally, Service Committees and Community Volunteer groups work within military establishments worldwide supporting those serving and their families. There is one such Service Committee in Northern Ireland covering the four bases of Aldergrove, Lisburn, Holywood and Ballykinler.
SSAFA's Branch network delivers casework through over 6,000 volunteers across the UK, Ireland, France Germany and Cyprus, mostly, but not exclusively, to veterans and their families, dealing with approximately 50 000 cases per annum.
SSAFA also provides a range of other services and facilities. We have a mentoring pilot scheme underway in which we pair trained volunteers with a wounded, injured or sick serviceman or woman transitioning out of the Army. This is operating in Northern Ireland.
We have a Victim Support Scheme and a Supporting Witnesses in Court service. We have residential homes for disabled and widows; we have homes providing free accommodation for the families of our badly wounded enabling them to visit their loved ones; an adoption service; Family Support Groups; a Children's Short Break Scheme; a confidential telephone service called 'Forcesline'; and the Military Wives Choir Foundation. None of these are Northern Ireland specific but they demonstrate the range of services SSAFA provides across the whole forces family.
SSAFA is also a leading member of COBSEO, the Confederation of Service Charities (www.cobseo.org.uk) but is not a campaigning or lobbying charity, focusing instead on delivering support to clients.
The work of the SSAFA Branch in Northern Ireland is never ending. Specifically our purpose is to help serving and ex‐service men or women and their wives, husbands, partners and dependent family members whenever they need friendship, advice or assistance, at any time from the day their service starts and for the rest of their lives. We do not sit in judgement; we simply try to help people to sort out problems ‐ in agreement with them and as fast as possible. We have 25 fully trained caseworkers doing just that in Northern Ireland, trained volunteers who give their time freely, and we deal with some 500 cases per year, distributing around £100,000 of assistance.
It is important to note that SSAFA does not give money to individuals seeking assistance. Where we believe the case is justified, we will pay for goods and services on proof of receipt, and we will pay the supplier, not the person supplied. At the same time, often we act as signposts to other providers.
Our remit extends to the Reserves and to qualifying officers and adult instructors of the Cadet Forces. With the changes currently underway we anticipate an even greater focus on the TA forces' requirements.
The assistance we distribute is a combination of funds we have raised locally and, more importantly, the funds we almonise from other benevolent sources (eg umbrella service charities, Regimental funds etc). The majority of cases with which we deal are those seeking benevolent or financial help. A growing number of those approaching us need debt counseling, but we are not legally qualified to deal with this and refer them to CAB sources.
In Northern Ireland, we have only one, part‐time, employee, otherwise depending entirely on volunteer time and effort. The funds we are able to raise locally go to meet the costs of running the Branch ‐ the office, volunteer training and expenses ‐ and the surplus goes towards the benevolence we can contribute to our welfare cases.
The areas which appear to raise the most concern about the implementation of a Military or Community Covenant are not so readily apparent from the cases which come forward to us. We do not experience issues of lack of school places. We do see those who have left the services asking about housing. Our advice is always that they should register straight away with the Housing Executive ‐ knowing that without points, they will most likely be then advised to go down the private rental route. This will in turn require a month's rent deposit and the first month in advance. This may well be when they approach us. Replacement or purchase of furniture, white goods, and supply of heating oil are amongst the other most common requests.
SSAFA's commitment nationally to the Armed Forces Community Covenant is a matter of record. In Northern Ireland we are well aware of the problems, perceived and real, which combine to have delayed or dismissed its implementation to date. As a first step towards bringing some co‐ordination to improving the awareness of and by veterans in need, a Veterans Forum is seeking to address initially the whole question of available resources. An initial meeting was held under the auspices of the Reserve Forces and Cadets Association and was jointly chaired by myself, the SSAFA Branch Chairman and the Director, Aftercare Service. It was agreed to publish a comprehensive guide to charities and organisations in Northern Ireland offering help and assistance to veterans and to ensure the widest possible distribution in publicly available locations.
April 2013
Written memorandum from Help for Heroes
1. Introduction 1.1 In keeping with Help for Heroes charitable objectives this evidence focuses on the care of the wounded. 1.2 Help for Heroes is committed to providing the best level of support for all wounded personnel, serving and ex‐serving, regardless of colour, creed, nationality or geographical location. It does not differentiate between the different services. 1.3 To date, Help for Heroes monies have been used to provide individual support to Northern Irish serving personal, veterans and their families. This support is provided both individually (eg. through our Quick Reaction Fund (QRF)) and via the Defence Recovery Capability (DRC), in conjunction with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Royal British Legion (TRBL). 1.4 Help for Heroes is working with the MoD and TRBL on the creation and management of regional Personnel Recovery Centres. These centres provide, in partnership with the Services and other Service charities, ongoing training and support for the wounded after Headley Court. These are, and will be, used by Northern Irish serving and ex‐serving personnel where capacity is available. The centres are in Edinburgh, Colchester, Catterick, Tidworth, Plymouth, and Germany. 1.5 Help for Heroes does not determine where the Recovery Centres are located – the MoD decides the best geographical location. 1.6 Help for Heroes is in ongoing discussions with MoD, NHS, the Department of Health, and the Department for Work and Pensions to develop an enduring support structure for our wounded veterans.
2. How H4H are supporting Northern Irish tri‐service personnel and veterans. 2.1 In Northern Ireland: 2.1.1 Quick Reaction Fund (QRF): Help for Heroes have committed £6m to the Quick Reaction Fund which provide ready money to injured, wounded or sick personnel who need it to make their life easier. Funds will be administered through the Services’ own charities and within 72 hours of the grant application. Already, c£50,000 has been granted to Northern Irish wounded serving and veterans. Some examples of these include: o Electric bikes o Hand bikes o Accommodation fees o Laptops
2.1.2 Restricted funds: The Charity does not currently have a restricted fund for NI but is planning to set one up in 2013.
2.2 Nationwide Facilities and Funding Available to Northern Irish Serving and Veterans – a few examples: 2.2.1 The Help for Heroes Gym and Swimming Pool complex at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre at Headley Court: Help for Heroes funded £8.5million for this complex, which is used by all serving personnel treated at Headley Court. 2.2.2 Combat Stress: Help for Heroes gave Combat Stress £3.5 million allow then to increase and extend the facilities and service offered to veterans suffering from a psychological condition related to their service. 2.2.3 Battle Back: Help for Heroes has so far funded over £1 million to the initiative which uses Adaptive and Adventure Training and Sports Rehabilitation to help those who are seriously wounded gain confidence and return to an active life. 2.2.4 Individual Recovery Plans (IRPs): Help for Heroes have committed £15 million through to September 2014 across the UK to support those transitioning to a new role in the Services or to civilian life by enhancing the existing resettlement package.
3. The Personnel Recovery Centres (PRCs) 3.1 The Recovery Centres are available for all service personnel and veterans where capacity is available. Therefore, if a Northern Irish service personnel is wounded in action they are typically cared for initially at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham before moving to Headley Court, Surrey for rehabilitation and then to their Personnel Recovery Unit (PRU) which is located where their regiment is based. They will then have access to – both residentially and as a day visitor ‐ the Personnel Recovery Centre that is the most appropriate for them.
3.2 To date, 20 wounded, injured and sick personnel (WIS) have attended courses at Tedworth House recovery centre. Nationwide, approximately 4% of those using the Recovery Centres are from Northern Ireland.
3.3 The option to return to the Recovery Centre where they are initially treated will be there for life, even once they have left the services, offering continuity of care as well as giving veterans (who may have left service because of their injury) the opportunity to return to the military community where they were based and enjoy the camaraderie and life that community offers. Grants may be available for transport and we have family as well as individual facilities.
April 2013